From: plucky@ais.org (Chris Adamson)
Subject: Re: The word "Libertarian" was invented by Spanish Anarchists
Organization: UMCC
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 12:53:51 GMT

In article <BASHFORD.92Sep10232136@griffy.scripps.edu> bashford@scripps.edu (Don &) writes:
>It seems to me that most of the people running around these days calling
>themselves "Libertarians" (e.g.  Libertarian Party, Self Governors,
>Ayn Rand groupies, etc.) are really just timid and truncated Anarchists.

	I, for one, am no anarchist.  As I understand it, anarchy is
a state of lawless mob-rule, in which no rights are guaranteed by the
society, and "might makes right" instead.

	I expect my society to keep my mind, body, and property safe from 
violent attack, either from criminals or from foreign enemies -- without
this security, society cannot function and freedom cannot exist.

	If you'd like to meet some genuine anarchists, I suggest you
give your local representative of Operation Rescue a call.  Their
tactics -- the forceful denial of an abortion clinic's property rights
and the attempt to overwhelm local police (they never pick BIG cities
with large police forces) -- create a localized state of anarchy, in
which their will can be forced on others.

>They oppose concentrated power in the form of "Big Government" but
>seem blind to the need to oppose concentrated power in the form
>of big business.  They spend their energies railing against taxation
>and some of the Govt's more odious invations of privacy (WoD, etc.)
>but ignore the tyranny of the workplace.

	The difference is that of public vs. private policy.  If an
employer strong-arms me and offends my values or denies my liberties,
I am free to seek out another employer [and the employer is, of course,
free to fire me and seek out other employees].  When the government
injures me, I cannot simply boycott it and turn to another US government.
[and I am not yet so hopeless that I would consider fleeing to another
country]

	The other difference between public and private institutions
is that the government is legally authorized to use physical force --
to fine, imprison, or even kill its citizens -- "against a populace that
is legally disarmed" [Ayn Rand's term]  If I don't go along with an
employer's tyranny, I can at worst be fired;  but if I don't go along
with the government's tyranny, by refusing a military draft or by not
paying my taxes or by using an unregistered encryption scheme (petty,
wouldn't you say?), I become a criminal and all my rights are forfeit.

	George Carlin once noted that the government, specifically the
army, is "the guys with all the flame-throwers".  He then added "I'd
say we're fucked if we have to go up against the army!"

    =========================================================================
   / Chris L. Adamson    /     Always look on the bright side of life:     /
  / Michigan State U.   /  Face east in the morning and west in afternoon./
 / Telecomm Production / ----------------------------------------------- / 
/ M.A. student        /   plucky@irie.ais.org , plucky2@aol.com         /
========================================================================
DISCLAIMER:  MSU wishes it could be so erudite and clever...
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian