A Request For My Fellow Anarchists

Many times, in debate anarchists are asked, "how do we get from here to there?". The question, even if unanswered isn't an argument for statism. There is still the self-evident truth that the state is illegitimate and needs to be abolished. In most cases, if the question is posed by the statist they're implicitly acknowledging that truth anyway.
However, the question as an argument against statism is not what I want to address. Rather, I have a request for my fellow anarchists, and this includes anarchists of all creeds. It calls for you to live your life defiantly and self-sufficiently. It calls for you to set an example for others to show how anarchism makes your life happier.

My request: Seek change through Civil Disobedience, exercise freedom of association, and use agorism as much as practicable to get what you need.

Civil Disobedience is the most effective and most moral way to change the political world around you. Freedom of association is the most effective and moral way to change your personal life. Agorism is the most effective and moral way to be self-sufficient and change your material world. I request of anarchists to live in the manner that they would under a free world, because once we are actively living in such a manner, there will be essentially no difference between a free world and the world we know.

Bob Barr Gets the LP Nomination

There's a few things wrong with Bob Barr from a small "L" libertarian perspective. He's the author of the defense of marriage act. He had a strong support for the drug war. Is this libertarian? Not even big "L" Libertarian. The party has no principles. All it has become is a paleo-conservative circle jerk.

How can you vote Libertarian, if you are a libertarian? The party has already failed in it's stated goals and has abandoned it's principles.

Anarchism, the New Atheism

Atheists do not believe in a god or gods because they have not seen any proof that such a thing exists. The burden of proof is on the believer to provide evidence, or they cannot be held rational on this subject. Moreover I think every atheist would agree that it is absolutely ridiculous when a theist says that a human cannot have any morals through atheist thought because they don't have a god to give it to them. Atheists generally do not accept this argument.

I'm an ignostic but I also understand that most atheists are free thinking individuals and question things that others try to indoctrinate to them. This same mindset can apply to studying governments and anarchy philosophy.

The example of the theists asserting that atheists have no morals without a god to follow, could be compared to that of Statists asserting that humans can have no law or order or peace without a state to provide it. The burden of proof is on the statist to show why people cannot function in day to day life without the use of force to keep them in line, just like the burden of proof is on the theist to show how and why people cannot function in day to day life without following a God.

Another fundamental fallacy is that Statists also claim that humans are inherently evil and they need a system to keep them in line. The burden of proof is on them to show how a system, made of (according to the statist's previous argument) inherently evil humans, cannot be considered evil and how it has the legitimacy it is perceived to have.

Anarchy is not to be confused with "anomie". Anomie means "no law, no order, and complete chaos". The word anarchy is derived from the Greek word "anarchos" which means "no archons" or "no rulers". There are many different theories of anarchy such as Anarcho-syndicalism/communism, Anarcho-Capitalism, Market Anarchy, and philosophies that they also stem from like Collectivist Anarchism, Individualist Anarchism, and Mutualist Anarchism. In Max Weber's influential definition of the state, it is that organization that has a "monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory". This force is evident in tax deducted from source or simply without consent, and if you resist these taxes you inevitably will be held at gunpoint, kidnapped and locked up.

If one asks the question "how are we to bring a stateless society about?" it is essentially asking “how can we, advocates of liberty, free the world from governments?” This can be compared to asking "how can atheists free the world from irrationality?" People who advocate a voluntary society have the inevitable truth and logic already on their side, for now the best way is to be able to argue the points logically and eloquently without hostility and anger. This is important as the non-aggression principle is an important part of anarchy. It must also be important to note that defending a big coercive, subsidized corporation working within the slanted rules of the state is not something a real anarchist would do. Corporations are simply extensions of the state and should be ridiculed and avoided as much as possible. Defending these institutions is something Kevin Carson called “vulgar libertarianism” and that is something anarchists and libertarians do not want to associate themselves with.

So the question is not "can anarchy work?" but "why does statism work?” The only reason it can function is perceived legitimacy, just like religion. We can get rid of that perception by spreading the truth and refuting the propaganda of the state consistently.