My name is Larken Rose, and I’m a voluntaryist. Or, if you prefer the scary-sounding, often misunderstood term, I’m an anarchist. I don’t believe “government” is necessary or legitimate. Ever. I spend much of my time and effort trying--with quite a bit of success, I might add--to get other people to reach the same conclusion. However, when I first suggest to others the idea of a society without any ruling class, that usually creates an avalanche of false assumptions and unfounded concerns in their heads. So let me be perfectly clear about what I am asking of statists (those who advocate “government”), and what I am not asking.
I am not asking you to forsake organization and civilization. I am not asking you to embrace "might makes right" or "survival of the fittest." I am not asking you to throw away your compassion. I am not asking you to abandon your core values, or to betray your moral code. In fact, what I am asking is the precise and exact opposite of all of that. All that I am asking of you is that, whatever you already believe about right and wrong, you apply it consistently, to everyone, all the time.
I therefore ask that you stop imagining that political rituals and documents, or badges and uniforms, give some people special rights that the rest of us don’t have. I ask that you stop begging those who wield political power to do things on your behalf that you yourself have no right to do on your own. I ask that you stop believing in the Divine Right of Politicians, and instead accept that each individual owns himself, and that no one can be a rightful master, and no one can be a rightful slave.
As for me, I will never assault or rob you—not because some legislature enacted a “law” telling me not to, but because I recognize that your time, your energy, your body and your life belong to you, not to me. It is, therefore, wrong for me to infringe on any of those things without your consent, whether by myself, or by hiring some thug to do it for me, or by voting or petitioning to have the enforcers of some political body do it on my behalf.
But this basic rule of decency applies in both directions. If you ask “government” to forcibly take the fruits of my labor against my will in order to fund whatever you want, or whatever you think is important, that is no more legitimate or righteous than you forcibly robbing me yourself. (Later using the stolen loot for something benevolent doesn't retroactively make the thievery justified.) And if you advocate the passage and enforcement of “laws” that try to forcibly control my choices and actions, when I am not threatening or harming anyone, that is no better than you trying to violently dominate me yourself. (No, you don't have the right to forcibly butt into other people's lives and be an intrusive, meddling busy-body, even if you think it's "for their own good," or "for the good of society.")
Most of us were taught that controlling our neighbors by way of “legal” means (elections, petitions, legislation, regulation, etc.) is a perfectly civilized, acceptable, and even virtuous thing to do. But it is not. Disguising theft and thuggery as something else by calling it “the will of the people” or “representative government” does not make it righteous. Calling the thugs “law enforcers,” calling the thieves “tax collectors,” and calling the mob boss “congressman” or “president,” does not change evil into good. A crook who speaks in euphemisms and dishonest rhetoric, wears a suit and tie, and has a fancy title, is still a crook.
In summary, all I am asking is that, if you recognize that it would be wrong for you to do something yourself, then don’t ask anyone else (including those in “government”) to do it for you. That's all. Be moral. Be consistent. Be principled. Once you are, you will find that you too are a voluntaryist. Because that is the only moral choice, the only rational choice, the only truly civilized choice, the only consistent and sane choice—the only choice that allows for peaceful human coexistence.