Revolutionary Market Anarchy: Review of a Radical Idea By: Raymond Lady Papers of Anti-State Bloomington No.

1 Anti-Copyright 2012 Introduction - Need for a Radical Movement The world is in need of a new radical movement. The classical anarchist movement, once a broad and multinational force with a presence in most developed nations and a great displeasure to many governments, declined after the First World War. After falling to a humiliating defeat during the Spanish Civil War, and reaching the depth of utter obscurity after the Second World War, anarchism has not, as of now, been revived as a large-scale movement. Nearly all radical workers' movements followed the same general pattern of decline or became increasing less radical, only to be absorbed into the conditions of capitalism and transformed into defenders of the structure they were originally inaugurated to combat. The class war has received not even lip service in the world since the fall of the Soviet Union, which itself was no great bastion of worker freedom. The Soviets, like all the collectivist-communists, had fallen into bureaucratic and centralized control by party bosses, who essentially replaced the capitalist bosses and in many cases even surpassed their cruelty. Communism has forever been exposed to the world as a failed ideology. The remaining communist institutions are on a continuing path of decline, often abandoning principle and attaching themselves to so-called left-capitalist parties in a last-ditch effort to remain relevant. The example of the US Communist Partynever a large force but nonetheless in decades past a presenter of radical challenges to the status quo, which has, since the fall of their Soviet backers, been reduced to endorsing the Democratic Party in the hopes that its capitalist looters will be more kind than those of the Republican Partydemonstrates how far the communists have fallen since their revolutionary heyday during the first half of the 20th century. Now that the world has entered the 21st century, the United States, with its military bases occupying over 130 countries and its forces currently or recently fighting actual conflicts of aggression in nearly a dozen of those nations, is the undoubted sole hegemonic power dominating the affairs of the world. It's neo-liberal trade policies and Keynesian economic centralization have largely drained the masses of any wealth they once held and transferred it to the politically well connected, in other words, the capitalist class. While the the purchasing power of the American dollar has declined nearly 90% since

the Second World War, the profit margins of American banks and other large financial institutions have grown considerably larger. The dumping of the confiscated wealth robbed from the American working class into the hands of the financial elite is now done more openly than ever before, with corporations whose irresponsible and often illegal business practices would collapse them and land their owners in jail in a freed market, instead are rewarded with trillion-dollar bailouts from their buddies in government. While a small effort, entirely revolving around electoral politics, has been mounted by the libertarian right in America and some of their issues have received minoralbeit mostly negativemedia coverage, any actual large scale movement working for radical systemic change has been absent from the political dialogue essentially since the decline of the classical anarchists, with perhaps the momentary exception of some elements of the youth movement during the 1960s. Despite what thinkers of various radical groups might have declared early on, it has become glaringly obvious the lack of any real philosophical grounding led to predictable confusion and endless debatewithin both the right-wing Tea Party and left-wing Occupy movementson such basic questions as why they even exist. In both movements, the absence of solid intellectual substance allowed the corporatist forces of the status quo to take hold, neutralizing any real chance of either camp affecting anything but cosmetic change. While the situation at the moment appears dismal, the current landscape of American politics actually holds open a large door for a movement willing to present substantive, radical challenges to the system. With those in the traditional left and right increasingly becoming aware that there is no worthwhile change to be accomplished through shuffling around the talking heads in government, the social climate is ripe for a movement with ample philosophical sophistication and a concert strategy to fill the too-long absent role of revolutionary provocateur. Such a movement presents itself in Revolutionary Market Anarchism. The Radical Alternative to State Capitalism Revolutionary Market Anarchism (hereafter RMA) is an independent and intellectually-diverse tendency within the larger anarchist community. Its philosophy is individualistic but solidaritarian, it's economics are market-orientated but anti-capitalist, its means are revolutionary but anti-militaristic. Revolutionary Market Anarchists (hereafter RMA'ists) engage in an assortment of activities including the formation of mutual aid societies and the operation of black market enterprises. While dispersed

over a range of activities, RMA'ists are unified in their belief in the importance of developing alternative social institutions to the current structuring of society, fulfilling the old slogan of the Industrial Workers of the World to, build the structure of the new society within the shell of the old. A. Economic Freedom, the State, and Social Power The current social organization of the developed world can best be called kleptocracy, the rule of thieves. The entire structure of the capitalist system is purposefully designed to drain the masses of their rightly earned wealth and deliver it to the political class, i.e., those in the leadership of government as well as the capitalists who are enriched either directly through bailouts and subsidies or indirectly through grants of monopoly. Kevin Carson of the Center for a Stateless Society writes: Capitalism, arising as a new class society directly from the old class society of the Middle Ages, was founded on an act of robbery as massive as the earlier feudal conquest of the land. It has been sustained to the present by continual state intervention to protect its system of privilege, without which its survival is unimaginable. The current structure of capital ownership and organization of production in our so-called "market" economy, reflects coercive state intervention prior to and extraneous to the market. From the outset of the industrial revolution, what is nostalgically called "laissez-faire" was in fact a system of continuing state intervention to subsidize accumulation, guarantee privilege, and maintain work discipline. Accordingly, the single biggest subsidy to modern corporate capitalism is the subsidy of history, by which capital was originally accumulated in a few hands, and labor was deprived of access to the means of production and forced to sell itself on the buyer's terms. The current system of concentrated capital ownership and large-scale corporate organization is the direct beneficiary of that original structure of power and property ownership, which has perpetuated itself over the centuries. 1 In other words, the so-called free market of capitalism is anything but free. The wealth accumulated by the ruling class was not made through the satisfaction of demands on the marketby voluntarily agreed upon exchange of goods and servicesnay, rather that wealth was obtained through force. The forces of the stateits regulators, tax collectors, police force, and militaryhave, through the
1 Carson, Kevin. Studies in Mutualist Political Economy. BookSurge, 2007. pg 143-144.

centuries, worked for the benefit of the corporate class, exploiting and subjugating the productive class of society and creating many of the social-economic problems in today's capitalist world. If it were not for the tireless work of the corporatist state then the massive inequalities of wealth, the overwhelming ecological problems created by corporate manufacturing, the lack of opportunity for self-employment, and many other related problems in today's world simply wouldn't exist. The RMA-ist's analysis of these problems resulting from state capitalism is both complete and original, distancing themselves from the intellectual mush permeating the debate in many circles. They have a deep understanding that, like Karl Marx said, there is indeed a class war, though their explanation of the conflict is informed by a better understanding of economic law, moral philosophy, and historical analysis. A major RMA'ist criticism of Marx's theory of class conflict is explained by countereconomist Samuel Edward Konkin III: The entrepreneurial problem is unsolvable for Marxism, because Marx failed to recognize the economic category. The best Marxists can do is lump them with new, perhaps mutated, capitalist forms. But if they are to fit the old class system, they are petite bourgeois, the very group that is to either collapse into proletarians or rise into the monopoly capitalist category. Small business should not increase in the advanced, decadent stages of capitalism. 2 Not only does Marx ignore the entrepreneurs, those who peacefully work to fulfill the needs of others on the market, but Marx is blind to see that it is the black marketeers who are the actual battlers of capitalism. Those working in the black market do not pay the state's taxes and thus do not support the wars of profit, state-structured bureaucracy, and network of monopoly that sustains the exploiter class. It is the RMA'ist who understands that if you do not water the state with economic and moral support, then it will soon die and with it the capitalist class whom it supports. Broadly speaking, RMA consists of two general branches of economic analysis each cross-pollinating and influencing the another, creating a healthy debate with it's community of activists. One side embraces the mutualism of 19th century French anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and the other accepts the leftist interpretation of the political economy of 20th century American anarchist Murray Rothbard. Not all mutualist can necessarily be called RMA-ists though, nor could every Rothbardian be placed
2 Conger, Wally. Agorist Class Theory. Movement of the Libertarian Left, 2007. pg 14.

under this label. What especially distinguishes RMA-ists, mutualists or Rothbardians, from others market anarchists, with whom they might share a general economic outlook, is the RMA-ist's radical means of organizing and revolutionary tactics. RMA-ists are unabashedly revolutionary as their name implies. RMA-ists do not mince words, their goal is to uproot the state, destroy the conditions of capitalism, and indeed all forms of aggression and oppression. They actively fight for social equality for racial minorities and women, champion Queer Liberation, and work for ecological stability. They reject the 'laws' of the state, and take no issue working through any means that would not undermine their eventual goal of a society free from economic and social privilege. Their economic platform is one of individual liberation and real economic freedom, not the 'economic freedom' of state capitalism which is nothing but privilege disguised. This economic liberation from capitalism, in combination with social cooperation, will radically transform the world into a far more peaceful and egalitarian place. B. Philosophy of Freedom Deeply rooted in the freedom traditions of the world, RMA takes influence from thinkers ranging from ancient Taoist monks to enlightenment philosophers to the great founding figures of anarchism. First and foremost, RMA-ists recognize the inalienable rights of each individual to live her life as she sees fit, to associate or not associate with whom she chooses, and have ultimate power in deciding over any decision concerning herself or her possessions. While minor differences on details might exist, the main axiom of the movement is the non-aggression principle, summed up by Murray Rothbard as: No one may threaten or commit violence ('aggress') against another man's person or property. Violence may be employed only against the man who commits such violence; that is, only defensively against the aggressive violence of another. In short, no violence may be employed against a nonaggressor. 3 This simple principle is strikingly similar to the Golden Rule, which is to be found in every world religion and moral philosophy, and has the most radical of implications. A world removed of aggression would entirely remove the state and capitalism from society, for neither could possibly exist without the forced taxation that supports their monstrous system of courts, police, soldiers, and prisons which holds the exploited masses captive. The consumer cooperative would be on an even footing with the
3 Rothbard, Murray. War, Peace, and the State. The Standard, April 1963.

corporate factory, the commons with the private chain, and the voluntary workers' collective with the wage-labor exploitation of the capitalists. This liberation of suppressed market actors, those of the working class, will open up opportunities for the masses that are simply not open to them with capitalism because of state-manufactured roadblocks. It is more than just freeing the individual to do as she chooses that RMA concerns itself with. The myriad social ills that inflict society, from bigotry to environmental unsustainability, are issues that the movement passionately cares about. RMA is egalitarian, and deeply so; its activists do not apologize for their desire for greater equality in all social relations. Care for one's neighbor and the love of mankind, that these are intensely important principles for any free society is readily accepted by the RMA-ist. Responding to critics of its egalitarian ways, RMA responds in similar terms to those of anarchist forefather Alexander Berkman who wrote: ...equality does not mean an equal amount but equal opportunity... Do not make the mistake of identifying equality in liberty with the forced equality of the convict camp. True anarchist equality implies freedom, not quantity. It does not mean that every one must eat, drink, or wear the same things, do the same work, or live in the same manner. Far from it: the very reverse in fact... Individual needs and tastes differ, as appetites differ. It is equal opportunity to satisfy them that constitutes true equality... Far from leveling, such equality opens the door for the greatest possible variety of activity and development. For human character is diverse. 4 C. Revolutionary Means The beginning of this paper documented the decline of the radical movements of the 20th century and proscribed a renewed radical movement for the 21st, one that would address modern problems but not fall into the traps that collapsed the historical anarchist and communist movements. Thus far, this paper has discuses the economic and ethical basis of RMA but has yet to explain how such ideas are expected to come into existence. Often called 'dual power' by libertarian socialists or 'counter economics' by agorists, the creation of social institutions outside of the reach of the corporate state is integral to the formation of a RMA-ist society. The practice of mutual aid is as ancient as human culture. At the dawn of humanity, people banded
4 Berkman, Alexander. What is Anarchism? AK Press, 2004.

together to form small communal societies for the exchange of labor to the benefit of each individual member. The biologist and anarchist theorist Peter Kropotkin explains: All that was an element of progress in the past or an instrument of moral and intellectual improvement of the human race is due to the practice of mutual aid, to the customs that recognized the equality of men and brought them to ally, to unite, to associate for the purpose of producing and consuming, to unite for purpose of defense to federate and to recognize no other judges in fighting out their differences than the arbitrators they took from their own midst. 5 RMA-ists understand mutual aid to be a foundation principle in the organization of human societies, one that has been suppressed by the state and the exploitative nature of corporate rule. The importance of building local worker, food, and housing cooperatives is stressed by RMA-ists as is the need for mutual banking, credit unions, allotments, tenant committees and a variety of other voluntarily organizations that go beyond just theory and actively build the elements of a new society. What separates RMA from other anarchist theories, that to varying degrees agree on the construction of these alternative institutions, is that others continue to work within the state system- obtaining its sanction, following it's regulations, and contributing to its air of legitimacy- while RMA attempts to subvert the sanction, regulation, and taxation of the state, whenever and wherever it is feasible to do so. Samuel Edward Konkin III explains: The Counter-Economy is the sum of all non-aggressive Human Action which is forbidden by the State... The Counter-Economy includes the free market, the Black Market, the underground economy, all acts of civil and social disobedience, all acts of forbidden association (sexual, racial, cross-religious), and anything else the State, at any place or time, chooses to prohibit, control, regulate, tax, or tariff. 6 Most people participate in the counter-economy to some degree or another; this involvement includes the purchase or sale of raw milk; marijuana, bootleg liquor, or other drugs; torrenting and other forms of intellectual property piracy; smuggling; tax evasion; the trafficking or hiring of illegal immigrants and a whole array of other activities that are either banned, taxed, or otherwise regulated by the state.
5 6 Kropotkin, Peter. Anarchism: It's Philosophy and Ideal. 1894. Konkin III, Samuel Edward. Counter-Economics: What it Is, How it Works.

It is on the subject of revolution that that the market in RMA comes into strategic play. The development of technologies like encryption, designed to evade the state have been growing at an ever increasing rate, making it much easier to escape detection and arrest than ever before. This is a trend that will only increase as the counter economy grows from the influx of participation driven by the growing increase of state intrusion into the lives of most people. It can be expected that as the institutions of the counter-economy grow, watered by the RMA philosophy, whether they be mutual aid societies or home-based enterprises, they will require defense from the state as well as rouge black marketeers who refuse to abide by the non-aggression principle. It is once the counter-economy reaches this level of sophistication that free-agent defense workers and municipal defense societies begin to appear and thus the formation of a new anarchist society comes into view. The revolution will likely start with a single spark and expand into a complete organized effort to bring down the state. Before this point, small conflicts between local police and the cooperative or commune defense organizations are to be expected, as the police begin to fear the strength of such associations. But the more nimble, intelligent, and motivated defense associations are likely to outwit the bureaucratic, clumsy police. Revolution will come when the associations simply no longer need to deal with the pestering of the state because they have the support of the people. The state will experience a quick death, cracking its final support as the new anarchist society, already fully developed, explodes from within. Of course, the whole revolutionary effort will not only be fought from the counter-economy. Generous concessions to the reality that a mass black-market movement will probably not occur until such a movement has popular support must be made. A political program coordinated with the goals of the movement should be pushed by pressure groups, organizing outside of counter-economic activities, through mass networking efforts, boycotts, sit downs, and general strikes. The creation of an alternative media to counter that of the corporate controlled press is already well underway on the Internet and can only be expected to explode as revolutionary feelings increase. The alternative media should help in the coordination of revolutionary activities. This strategy puts the most amount of pressure on the state, making mass repression less feasible, as well as providing political cover for the movement. The day when the state would be overthrown has been a dream of anarchists for generations. That dream though, remained out of reach until the modern era when the required technologyneeded to sustain a mass movements outside of the state's reachhas been made available. The correct

conditions for a successful anarchist revolution are within reach if the benefits of such a happening can be explained to the masses. The RMA-ists have the right technology, the right philosophy, and the right social climate, so a perfect storm might be brewing just beyond the horizon. The revolution could be not as far off as many believe. Origins of Revolutionary Market Anarchism and its Relationship to Other Movements A. Origins of a Movement Revolutionary Market Anarchism has no singular founder or founding date, rather it has been a slowly developed tendency within the radicaland more specifically anarchistcommunity. A number of thinkers, ranging from philosophers to economists to professional agitators, have had a profound and lasting effect on the ideology and orientation of the movement. A brief overview of some of those thinkers and how they relate to RMA is what constitutes this section. The first individual to ever call himself an anarchist was Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809-1865) and his importance to the anarchist idea is hard to overstate. He was a philosopher, publisher, and prolific writer as well as an associate of Karl Marx, of whom he later parted with because of Marx's statecollectivist views. Proudhon was utterly opposed to capitalism but he was equally opposed to the state ownership suggested by the authoritarian socialists and communists. He suggested a third way, that of a free market anti-capitalism based around worker's cooperatives and workers associations, which he called mutualism. Proudhon's mutualism deeply influenced the entire American individualist anarchist tradition and has had a special influence on the mutualist branch of RMA. Lysander Spooner (1808-1887) and Benjamin Tucker (1854-1939) stand out as two of America's most significant anarchists and are both generally held in high regard by RMA-ists. Spooner argued for a society based upon natural law, essentially reflecting the non-aggression principle of the Rothbardian branch of RMA, while Tucker, originally a natural law advocate, came to embrace egoism as his philosophy and mutualism as his economic school. Natural law theory holds that the rights of the individual are inherent by their nature, while egoism argues no rights exist until they are created by contract. Spooner is remembered today for his involvement in the abolitionist and labor movements, as well as his founding of the American Letter Mail Company, who's challenge to the government's monopoly ended in its forced closer. Tucker is remembered as the founder of Liberty magazine and the author of Instead of a Book.

Two individuals who's work found its way to the pages of Liberty and also influenced the development of RMA were Voltairine de Cleyre (1866-1912) and Emma Goldman (1869-1940). De Cleyre was an American individualist anarchist who later in her life came to become one of the first theorists of 'anarchism without adjectives', which holds any system is acceptable as long as it does not involve force. Goldman was born in Russia but immigrated to America and became the most famous of the American anarchists, traveling across the nation delivering speeches on anti-capitalism, atheism, free love, freedom of speech, and many other topics. Important works that have influenced the development of RMA by de Cleyre include Anarchism and American Traditions among other writings and by Goldman are her book Anarchism and Other Essays as well as her groundbreaking magazine Mother Earth. For RMA-ists who's economic philosophy is left-Rothbardian in nature, the many works by Murray Rothbard (1926-1995) are of course paramount. Rothbard was a student of Austrian economist and classical liberal Ludwig von Mises, he was a prolific writer on many topics ranging from economics and history to philosophy and political science. Rothbard, like all of the previously mentioned thinkers, was an especially complicated individual and as such his relationship to RMA is complex. Throughout his life, Rothbard tried many strategies to promote his ideas. Through the 1960s he tried to ally with the the New Left and student movement, in the 70s and 80s he was a figure in the Libertarian Party attempting to move their platform in a more radical direction, and in the 1990s he tried to find common cause with anti-war paleo-conservatives. During these various phases, Rothbard made compromises in his though as a means of gaining political traction, something the RMA-ist condemn. RMA-ists especially condemn Rothbard's attempts to make common cause with reactionaries on the right during the last few years of his life, something that has caused immense harm to his image. Despite these criticisms, Rothbard's theoretical work as well as what he did while working with the New Left, the student and Black Liberation movements during the 1960s is seen as very significant to the development of RMA. Despite his many flaws, for many RMA-ists Rothbard remains a central figure. Karl Hess (1923-1994), a longtime friend of Rothbard, and Roy Childs (1949-1992) are seen by many as important thinkersin many respects like Rothbardbut without the baggage of misdeeds and bad relationships that Rothbard made.

If it can be said there was an original RMA-ist, Samuel Edward Konkin III (1947-2004) would be that person. In his New Libertarian Manifesto, Konkin was the first to describe how a black market-based revolution could occur, this of course being a central element in the RMA strategy. Konkin's contributions to the anarchist movement are great, his New Libertarian Notes magazine appeared in many forms from 1971 to 1990 and is remembered as a groundbreaking achievement in anarchist journalism. His organization, the Movement of the Libertarian Left, served as an incubator for the ideas of RMA and is continued today as the Alliance of the Libertarian Left, a group which many RMA-ists are proud members. It can easily be said that the whole of Konkin's works are foundational to RMA. RMA-ist tendencies are to be seen in the modern day across many institutions and websites, and in the thinking of many contemporary anarchist thinkers. While at the writing of this essay, RMA is not a conscious mass movement, it can be said that it's ideas are beginning to leak into the mainstream. The Internet has served as an awesome tool in educational and organization efforts for RMA-ists, as well as strengthening the bounds of camaraderie between its community of activists. In the present age, the Internet is the central organ in the RMA movement. B. Relationship to Leftism A brief word should be said about the relation of RMA to what is generally called the political left. RMA can be said to be related to Left-libertarianism but not necessarily a part of it. Left-libertarian tendency is described by libertarian scholar Sheldon Richman: Left-libertarians favor worker solidarity vis--vis bosses, support poor peoples squatting on government or abandoned property, and prefer that corporate privileges be repealed before the regulatory restrictions on how those privileges may be exercised. They see Walmart as a symbol of corporate favoritismsupported by highway subsidies and eminent domainview the fictive personhood of the limited-liability corporation with suspicion, and doubt that Third World sweatshops would be the best alternative in the absence of government manipulation. Left-libertarians tend to eschew electoral politics, having little confidence in strategies that work through the government. They prefer to develop alternative institutions and methods of working around the state. 7 These views are certainly held by RMA-ists and so, in this respect, they may be called left-libetarian. 7
Richman, Sheldon. Libertarian Left. American Conservative March 2011, pg 28.

On a deeper level though, RMA rejects the left-right divide as a creation of the corporate class. The bickering between the so-called left Democratic Party and the so-called right Republican Partytwo parties that agree on every facet that make up the corporatist and militarist branches of capitalism is exposed by RMA-ists as nothing but a performance orchestrated for the benefit of the elites. Nothing beneficial can ever come from debates revolving around pro-left and pro-right arguments for they continue the false paradigm of the capitalist system. RMA is pro-freedom and pro-people and is opposed to anti-freedom and anti-people movements, regardless if they are left state-liberals or right state-conservatives. C. Critique of Vulgar Libertarianism Another word should be spoken, this one on the defenders of state-capitalism who often use the language of laissez-faire and often call themselves 'libertarian'. These 'libertarians' are nothing but defenders of that status quo. Explains Kevin Carson: Vulgar libertarian apologists for capitalism use the term "free market" in an equivocal sense: they seem to have trouble remembering, from one moment to the next, whether theyre defending actually existing capitalism or free market principles. So we get the standard boilerplate article arguing that the rich cant get rich at the expense of the poor, because 'Thats not how the free market works' implicitly assuming that this is a free market. When prodded, theyll grudgingly admit that the present system is not a free market, and that it includes a lot of state intervention on behalf of the rich. But as soon as they think they can get away with it, they go right back to defending the wealth of existing corporations on the basis of 'free market principles.' 8 These are the same self-described 'libertarians' you will see on corporate news channels defending some nasty idea for the benefit of the elite like corporate tax cuts, deregulation, or antienvironmentalism. These individuals often find themselves in positions of leadership in the Libertarian Party or writing columns explaining how Republican welfare-warfarism is somehow superior to Democrat welfare-warfarism. Institutions like the Cato Institute and the Reason Foundation, both heavily funded the the billionaire Koch brothers, owners of the Koch Industries oil interests, are prime examples of the failure of vulgar libertarianism. Both organizations regularly downplay issues like militarism, civil liberties, legalization of drugs, and elimination of corporate welfare that would
8 Carson, 2007. pg 142.

actually be beneficial to the masses. Vulgar libertarians do nothing to advance any cause but that of the status quo, do not be fooled by their use of libertarian terminology. Cato, Reason, and the rest of the beltway 'libertarian' crowd are bad news- they are the enemies of RMA and the working class masses. Their corruption of the word 'libertarian' has made it largely unusable for actual defenders of liberty, without added clarification as in the term left-libertarian. As to avoid confusion, individualist anarchism or market anarchism are generally better terms to use when describing the family of idea from which RMA springs. Conclusion - Prospects for the Future Revolutionary Market Anarchism, in the current world, could be described more as a tendency than a movement. Its names are many (Left-Rothbardianism, Mutualism, Agorism, Voluntaryism, ect.), as are the minor disagreements that fracture its activists. But the situation need not be like this. As has been documented in this paper, RMA is an independent social philosophy. It has all the required elements to become a full-fledged movement in its own right and must become so if it is to succeed. This should be our first goal as Revolutionary Market Anarchists, to instill a uniquely revolutionary identity into our consciousness. Like it or not, we are a small vanguard of radicals; if there is to be a larger movement it must be by our work. We must educate ourselves to be intellectual and moral leaders first if we are to have a mass movement made up of the regular members of society in the future. The moment is ripe for our type of movement to come to front view if only our message could be heard by the masses. The economic and social liberation we support could be a reality very soon if we only act. A large thanks has to go out to Brad Spangler, Kevin Carson, Tom Knapp, and the others at the Center for a Stateless Society; the work they do for the movement on a shoestring budget is irreplaceable. Another thanks goes to those at Individual Sovereign University who are attempting to educate the world in counter-economics and other topics that are very important if we are to build a new anarchist society. These two organizations deserve the support of all who would like to see a free world in their lifetime. Also, Anti-State Bloomington, the local activist organization which published this monograph, is as of this writing in it's early stages of formation. Local organizations such as this one need your support. If you don't have one in your community then work on organizing one, it is these local communities which will expand to our world-wide movement.

The challenges we face from within our own community are a thousandfold, the obstacles we must overcome from the outside are just as great. The state is a ruthless enemy. The looter class will not easily give up the monopolies that they have held for centuries. Many of us might suffer fighting for a better future, but despite all these hardships we are to expect with revolution, we will gain a greater prize- our liberty. When a revolutionary situation arises in a country, before the spirit of revolt is sufficiently awakened in the masses to express itself in violent demonstrations in the streets or by rebellions and uprisings, it is through action that minorities succeed in awakening that feeling of independence and that spirit of audacity without which no revolution can come to a head. Men of courage, not satisfied with words, but ever searching for the means to transform them into action, men of integrity for whom the act is one with the idea, for whom prison, exile, and death are preferable to a life contrary to their principles, intrepid souls who know that it is necessary to dare in order to succeed, these are the lonely sentinels who enter the battle long before the masses are sufficiently roused to raise openly the banner of insurrection and to march, arms in hand, to the conquest of their rights. ~ Peter Kropotkin Further Reading Carson, Kevin. Studies in Mutualist Political Economy. BookSurge, 2007. Carson, Kevin. Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective. BookSurge, 2008. Carson, Kevin. The Homebrew Industrial Revolution. BookSurge, 2010. Chartier, Gary. The Conscience of an Anarchist. Cobden Press, 2011. Chartier, Gary and Johnson, Charles, ed. Markets, Not Capitalism. Minor Compositions, 2011. Childs, Roy. Big Business and the Rise of American Statism. Reason Magazine, March 1971. Conger, Wally. Agorist Class Theory. Movement of the Libertarian Left, 2007. De Cleyre, Voltairine. The Select Works of Voltairine de Cleyre. Mother Earth Publishing, 1914. Goldman, Emma. Anarchism and Other Essays. Dover Publications, 1969. Hess, Karl. Dear America. William Morrow, 1975. Konkin III, Samuel Edward. New Libertarian Manifesto. KoPubCo, 1983. Rothbard, Murray. Man, Economy, and State with Power and Market. Van Nostrand, 1962. Rothbard, Murray. The Ethics of Liberty. New York University Press, 1982. Tucker, Benjamin. Instead of a Book. Self-Published, 1897.