What is an AnarchObjectivist?



An AnarchObjectivist is one who accepts the fundamental principles of Ayn Rands philosophy, but rejects her advocacy of minarchism as inconsistent with those basic positions in metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics.

The contradiction between the Objectivist Ethics and minarchism

“The basic political principle of the Objectivist ethics is: no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. No man——or group or society or governmenthas the right to assume the role of a criminal and initiate the use of physical compulsion against any man. Men have the right to use physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use. The ethical principle involved is simple and clear-cut: it is the difference between murder and self-defense.” – Ayn Rand “The Objectivist Ethics” (emphasis added)


“A civilized society is one in which physical force is banned from human relationships—in which the government, acting as a policeman, may use force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use.” – Ayn Rand “Man’s Rights” (emphasis added)

Now, the problem arises when Miss Rand elaborates on the nature of government:

a government holds a legal monopoly on the use of physical force.” – Ayn Rand “America’s Persecuted Minority: Big Business” (emphasis in original)

If a government holds a legal monopoly on the retaliatory use of force, it necessarily initiates the use of force against those whom would seek to start businesses in the arbitration and defense services industries, as well as all those who seek to do business with such persons. If a defense service is not allowed to exist or operate, yet has not initiated the use of force against anyone, and only retaliates against those who have initiated the use of force, those individuals rights have been violated.

A government that holds a legal monopoly on the retaliatory use of force actually initiates the use of force against its citizens, which violates the basic political principle of the Objectivist ethics.

Best Case Scenario

If, under an Objectivist Minarchy, the government did allow competition in the fields of arbitration and defense services,market pressures would render the government obsolete. As such a government would be voluntarily funded (so as not to violate the basic principle), private firms, in a free market, would be able to provide services cheaper and more efficiently than a government could and so would put the government out of business, and lead to de facto anarcho-capitalism.

Resolving the Contradiction

In conclusion, AnarchObjectivists reject the coercive (at worst) and/or obsolete (at best) nature of the state in favor of Voluntaryist solutions to law, arbitration, dispute resolution, and defense

Posted in AnarchObjectivism | 7 Comments

Miley Cyrus And The Libertarian Renegade Culture


The most controversial and celebrated artist this year is, without a doubt, Miley Cyrus. Miley has quickly and flawlessly altered her image from 2000′s bubblegum sensation to corporate-sponsored rebel. Miley has captivated audiences with what many consider to be shocking performances that embrace hedonism and the mocking of puritan values. While many might consider her performances cheap stunts, they are stunts that undeniably work – getting her attention and altering her image into something new and even radical. But why should libertarians care about Miley Cyrus?

Well, because the mainstream matters and, more importantly, cultural institutions and constructs that persist matter. Libertarians have done an awful nice job in developing theory on how an ideal society ought to operate while completely ignoring ever getting anyone to care about their work that wasn’t already interested. Why the hell should an average individual who has barely a glancing knowledge on issues of politics and philosophy give a damn about libertarian values? The truth is many libertarians are by their nature rationalist iconoclasts. We enjoy non-conformity and bucking the system. We think that the most potent form of attack is a syllogism or perhaps the 25th Anniversary edition of Atlas Shrugged. The libertarian does not see rigor or intellect in much of mainstream culture and, therefore, deems it unnecessary of further analysis. This rejection has led to libertarianism being regarded mostly as a kook theory meant more for loners and introverts.

If libertarians want to make an effective change on society, they need to spend less time in debates over theory and more time injecting their ideas into mainstream culture and supporting the cultural norms which favor liberty and personal freedom. Cultural norms about sex, drugs and all other manner of fun that people don’t want other people to have are only as good as the views of those people themselves. The law is not an ethereal force which one violates necessarily. It is a matter of social recognition. Nobody cares about jaywalking in New York City enough to enforce the law because everybody does it. It would be impossible to try and enforce. Libertarians need to stop trying to argue people out of their cultural inculcations and start promoting the cultural values they care about.

Roderick T. Long and Charles W. Johnson have argued effectively for why libertarians should embrace traditionally leftist values as a matter of cultural thickness. The success of a libertarian society is not simply based upon smashing the state, but smashing all forms of oppression. What good is a stateless society where women are still treated like property? Where your race determines your socioeconomic status? Libertarians need to take non-government forms of oppression seriously, since it is upon such non-governmental oppression that the state gains its power. (See Roderick Long, “Libertarian Feminism: Can This Marriage Be Saved?”)

There are certain forms of oppression which are not simply dependent upon the State apparatus’ existence. Laws are made up of norms which people are willing to recognize and act on. Even prototypically authoritarian political institutions like the military rely more on cultural acceptance, obedience and docility than on the intentions of generals and politicians. What if there were a war and no one showed up? Political institutions give the military a bully pulpit, but no one is being forced into military service. No one puts a gun in your face and demands you support the troops. If tomorrow people stopped acting like every soldier was a hero and every war a great sacrifice for American values, we might begin to see the decline of this evil empire.

Like Johnson and Long, I too see a necessity for thick conceptions of libertarianism. Specifically, I think more libertarians ought to embrace what I call cultural libertinism, by which I mean the expression of an individual’s will to do what she and she alone desires. It means supporting the spontaneous actions of individuals whether they be expressions of our own personal morality or not. When cultural norms are used to stifle innocent personal preferences, libertarians ought to take exception.

Historian Thaddeus Russell has argued at length that the freedom we often take for granted, from women enjoying more independence to the weekend, we have renegades to thank. Renegades are not political figures. They don’t give a shit about the non-aggression principle (NAP) or a stateless society. In some cases, they might be rather unpleasant people you wouldn’t want to be left alone with for too long. They’re certainly not the disciplined folks who would be at the heads of mutual aid societies or coops. They might be those nasty free riders we fear so much. Nevertheless, the very acts we might be disgusted by have given us fuller expression of personal freedom, both politically and culturally.

What the hell does any of this have to do with the antics of Miley Cyrus? Well, I see Miley’s actions, as of late, whether they be embracing her sexuality, being open about her use of MDMA or smoking a joint on stage in front of millions, as not merely acts intended to shock, but as forms of cultural disobedience. Cultural disobedience, like civil disobedience, involves the public display of acts which are culturally frowned upon. When Miley rejected her role as a teenage sensation and began grinding wildly against Robin Thicke with a background of sexualized teddy bears, she was doing more than grabbing attention for her new album, she was stripping away what she saw as this culture’s expectations of her as an “innocent.” Miley is displaying her sexuality as a force for good, as something powerful to be enjoyed at an individual’s discretion.

Recently Miley engaged in another act of cultural disobedience by lighting up a joint on stage during a televised event. Again, we can see this as a cheap publicity stunt. She wouldn’t have done this if corporate lawyers hadn’t approve it already. But this is a sign that norms about drug use are breaking down. The biggest pop sensation of our day is being brazen with her drug use and, as a result, doing her own part in normalizing drugs into our culture. As I’ve argued elsewhere:

“… we will not get to a point where consumption of drugs isn’t severely regulated by society and the State without actual drug users participating in passive civil disobedience. Those who light up joints on their porch or in public parks are not only getting high, they are undermining the social norms that make these laws sustainable. When we endorse conservatives who pay lip service to libertarian policies and try to kick out those we see as deviant, we are endorsing the culture of puritanism.  We undermine what should be our true values, we endorse the values that make drug laws possible.”

Consider this merely an extension or application of Agorist thought. Agorism recognizes that a government is only as good as the economy it controls. The libertarian culture warrior recognizes that culture plays a similar foundational role for the laws that are enforced. Drugs became illegal not just because politicians said so, but because of scare campaigns about their effects and the kinds of people that want to use them. Women did not simply wake up to their oppression the day after laws appeared regulating the use of their bodies. It was already accepted by the dominate culture that women needed to be treated in such a way and so it manifested itself into law.

Miley Cyrus is a potent force for good, as are other pop culture figures like her. You don’t have to dig their music or the way these people sell themselves. The fact is libertarians ought to adopt sex-positive and drug-positive attitudes in order to eliminate the oppression which is imposed on sexual minorities, drug users and cultural dissidents. Consider that there are more expressions of your political philosophy than the NAP. When people stand up and declare their freedom in spite of social norms, we ought to point to them as the best representatives of our philosophy. We must support cultural renegades and, especially, mainstream culture that deviates from traditional mores. By promoting libertarian and even libertine values in the mainstream, libertarianism is done a great service. The culture war is real and libertarians need to start taking it more seriously.

Original: http://c4ss.org/content/22550

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Orthodox Objectivist Harry Binswanger Mocks the Passing of Libertarian Icon Barbara Branden


This is despicable behavior for anyone, but it is especially sad from a longtime associate of Ayn Rand and affiliate of the Ayn Rand Institute. Orthodox Objectivist’s like Binswanger are so bitter and petty.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Going Galt: Individuals Seceding by Wendy McElroy

“In Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged, a group of producers withdraw their talents from a parasitic society so as to speed along its collapse in order to rebuild on the ruins. But Going Galt doesn’t need to be a strategy for social change. It can be an individual choice and a strategy that increases the Galter’s freedom, quality of life, and self-respect. It doesn’t require leaving society for an isolated community or ceasing to fight for general freedom – for example, through writing and other activism. Going Galt as an individual choice simply means withdrawing support from parasites in a process that resembles a private boycott or secession. The withdrawal can be partial or it can be total; the extent of Going Galt depends on many factors including the comfort level of the individual.”

Link | Posted on by | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Barbara Branden RIP

Early adopter and long time Rand associate Barbara Branden passed away yesterday, 12/11/2013. I would highly recommend her course “Principles of Efficient Thinking.” I have heard it said that the quality of your thinking determines the quality of your life. If that is the case, Ms. Branden lived amazingly, and certainly improved mine as well. I knew her through objectivistliving.com, where she was a delightful contributor. She will be missed.

Posted in AnarchObjectivism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

In Praise of Looters: Harry Binswanger’s Defense of Goldman Sachs

This article of mine was recently published at dailyanarchist.com

In Praise of Looters: Harry Binswangers Defense of Goldman Sachs

Harry Binswanger’s 2013 praise of Goldman Sachs at Forbes.com ignores the context that the US does not have a free market economy. The US is a mixed economy, whose financial sector is monopolized by banking cartels. Counter to Binswanger’s argument that, “since profit is the market value of the product minus the market value of factors used, profit represents the value created,” the corporate profits of Goldman Sachs are the result of lobbying, government insider favors, the infamous 2008 bailout of AIG. and their membership in the central bank’s monetary monopoly. This misdirection is the primary characteristic of what Roderick Long called “right-conflationism.”

Aside | Posted on by | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Fast Food in a Freed Market Doesn’t Look Like This.

The Ayn Rand Institute continues it’s divorce from reality with its latest blog entry “The fast-food industry is not a burden” by Carl Svanberg. Apparently taking a que from fellow ARI associate Harry Binswanger, this author drops the context of the mixed economy and attempts to defend the fast food industry on free market grounds.

Svanberg claims that “The fast-food industry is not forcing anyone to accept the wages they offer. On the contrary, people accept these wages voluntarily.” This much is true, the fast food industry isn’t forcing anyone. But, to say that these positions are taken voluntarily is disingenuous, in light of the fact that the state has artificially inflated the labor supply by restricting the opportunities of workers with regulatory barriers to entry into self-employment and business start up and also driving up the cost of living. Because of the states interference into the market that creates a near endless supply of cheap labor, laborers are put in a disadvantageous position from which to negotiate pay and benefits.

The second reason this industry is able to continue with its business model is state handouts. Without welfare, food stamps, and medicaid, workers would not be able to afford to take these positions and employers would have to pay better wages and give better benefits to attract workers.

Rather than acknowledge the massive amount of state interference giving rise to the fast food industry’s business model, Svanberg defends the actions of the industry on purely free market terms, as if a free market exists today.

“The impression the minimum wage lobbyists want you to get is that the fast-food industry is forcing unjustifiably low-pay on to workers who are powerless to refuse. But the industry is not in any position to set wages arbitrarily. It has to compete for workers by offering wages that reflect the market value of their work. If a business offers people more than they are worth, it will lose money. If it offers people less than they are worth, they will work elsewhere. The cause of low pay in the fast food sector is not industry stinginess, but the fact that these are low-skill, low-experience jobs.”

Of course this would be true, if we lived in a free market. But the fact is that the business can pay workers less than they are worth, and they can not seek employment elsewhere, not because of any law restricting them to their job, but because of the regulatory environment favoring large firms that has created a surplus of workers.

Kevin Carson writes:

“Under capitalism — as opposed to a freed market — the state makes the means of production artificially scarce and expensive for workers, and raises the threshold of comfortable subsistence, so that workers are artificially dependent on wage labor.

The state enforces artificial property rights and artificial scarcities, like so-called “intellectual property” (the source of the $150 markup on Nike sneakers that cost $5 to produce) and absentee title to vacant and unimproved land. It organizes the economy into oligopoly cartels, with “sticky” prices (probably a 20% price markup in most industries) and enormously inefficient and high-overhead production methods. It enforces entry barriers to self-employment by inflating the capital outlays required for production, through such things as “safety” codes that criminalize the use of ordinary household capital goods and zoning laws that criminalize household microenterprises. It impedes comfortable subsistence by promoting real estate bubbles and criminalizing competition from vernacular building techniques.”

In true vulgar libertarian fashion, Svanberg then proposes the abolition of the welfare state, without a word about abolishing the state privilege that gives rise to such blatantly exploitative business models, as if the welfare recipients are leeches on society, but the businessmen taking advantage of workers with the assistance of the state are saints. As an advocate of freed markets, I, of course, would like to see the welfare state abolished, but not before the regulatory environment created by state intervention is dismantled, putting workers and employers on even footing.

Posted in AnarchObjectivism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

How to Spread Anarchy

Occasionally, someone will ask me why I spend time on orthodox objectivist forums, debating, and generally being exposed to the nastiness only statists seem capable of.

Here is a copy of a message I received this week on reddit.com, where i have been very active over the last 2 years. It isn’t too often that an AnarchObjectivist gets fan mail. This is the reason that I do what I do. (I have removed the senders name to protect their privacy)

“Let me begin this message by saying that I am new to Reddit. I just recently discovered this site, and this is my first PM here.

I came here a few months back as an Objectivist. I didn’t think much about heterodox and orthodox Objectivism, but I did always take issue with Rand’s minarchy. For a person who talked about government ever expanding, she sure hated anarchy. But I never understood it.

Then, I found Reddit. Subsequently, I found r/Objectivism. And, by sheer luck, I discovered one of your posts, one about Galt’s Gulch being an ancap society. I was shocked, but intrigued. I read your blog, and I started trolling around r/Anarcho_Capitalism. My eyes opened, as much as when I read Rand for the first time (Capital: The Unknown Ideal, btw). I reread Atlas Shrugged, and I saw the agorism and voluntaryism there. I also looked up various complaints about the ARI, and I was disgusted by their neoconservatism.

Today, I call myself an “AnarchObjectivist” thanks to you. I created this account simply to PM you and tell you this, and I look forward to becoming an active member of the Objectivism and Ancap subreddits to spread the idea of Open Objectivism. Thank you very much!”

Messages and comments like this certainly make everything worthwhile. Thank you, and thank you to everyone who has expressed your support!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Top 10 Subreddits for Aspiring Agorists

The prospect of building a community outside of the state sanctioned economy can seem like a daunting task, but with a little creativity the range of actions open to the aspiring agoAgorism_Poster_by_thorsmitersawrist are seemingly endless. The opportunities are all around us, some small and others large, to deprive the state of the resources it uses to aggress against individuals. It is my hope that this list of subreddits will serve as inspiration for members of the community to seek out ways to live their lives free of state intervention.

I have intentionally chosen non-ideological subreddits and whenever possible, subreddits that are not listed as “default” subs. I have also attempted to no list any subreddit which is on the sidebar of a subreddit that is already listed. The sidebars of these subreddits are often the most valuable resource, and I would highly recommend reading them to get the most out of the subreddits, including exploring the list or related subreddits many sidebars offer.

1) Frugal

Spending less in the formal economy means the state has less ability to tax and you can use the money you save on other agorist projects

2) FreeLance

This subreddit is dedicated to teaching you how to be a free-lancer. There are many skills that can be used to free-lance. Photography, writing, coding, and graphic design are all skills that can be traded in the informal economy.

3) StartUps

As an entrepreneurial movement, start ups are at the heart of agorism. The guides and tips on this subreddit could make the difference between a thriving agorist enterprise and failure.

4) Gardening

Gardening is an easy skill that I feel is integral to agorism. Not only can you cheaply produce your own food, you can also sell any surplus at the local farmers market, or online (especially, soaps, canned goods, and other nonperishables that can be produced). The sidebar here has links to a lot of useful skill sets, such as /r/canning, that raise the potential value of your gardening efforts. For those with not much space, there are specialized subreddits for just about any living situation: http://www.reddit.com/r/GuerrillaGardening and http://www.reddit.com/r/SquareFootGardening

5) BuyItForLife

Buying once and maintaining an item, even if it is more expensive at first, can often mean great savings over the life of the item. A n example is choosing to shave with a straight razor instead of buying disposables over and over again.

6) Homestead

Being able to produce more of what you need yourself is valuable for situations where you can’t otherwise find a state-free alternative. Producing your own electricity and collecting water can reduce your dependence on utility companies, which are often monopolized by the state.

7) BodyWeightFitness

Everyone knows that staying in shape is important. By using bodyweight workouts, you can avoid gym memberships, or buying equipment.

Personally, I prefer barbell workouts. You can often buy used barbell sets, relatively cheap.

8) CordCutters

Many avenues are available for enjoying your favorite artists work, without surrendering to state extortion and without giving recording/movie/software industry more money to lobby for ever more conspicuous property rights violations through “intellectual property” law enforcement. This subreddit will teach you how to master them all.

9) Flipping

The sidebar of this subreddit is complete course in buying and selling online. This is a great way for an agorist to supplement their income, or for some, as a sole means of income, derived entirely from the informal economy.

10) NetSec

Learn the skills necessary to protect your information on and offline, access the internets black markets, and many other activities of interest to agorists. Again, the sidebar here is a wonderful learning tool.

Bonus: AgoristLiving My subreddit has a growing collection of  practical agorist solutions to life’s challenges.

Posted in Free Market Solutions | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

How to Become an Agorist and Fight the State in 7 Easy Steps

keep-calm-and-practice-agorismThis list is presented in the interest of keeping resources out of the hands of the State and their accomplices in business by minimizing participation in the state economy by doing business in the informal economy whenever possible.

Buy Used

Buying used can often mean great savings, but it also means that the money you spend isn’t going into state or corporate hands. (craigslist, physical yard sales and local yard sale websites and facebook groups, farmers markets (also useful for soaps), thrift stores (you can often ask for a discount by way of tax exemption in these types of stores),

Use an Alternative Currency

Bitcoin, precious metals, bartering, local voluntary currencies are all ways to impede the States ability to tax and track your purchases. These are used preferentially to legal tender.

Grow your Own

Food. Personal gardening and farming can reduce your dependence on the state economy and ensure that your food is what you think it is, unlike that processed and treated in factory farms. Not having to buying food will reduce your grocery bill as well which further deprives the state of resources in the form of sales tax you would have paid on the product. A goat can provide 150lbs of meat per year and an average of 2 quarts of milk which can be drank, used in cooking, and made into cheese or soap. Even if you don’t have much land, you can take advantage of urban gardening and permaculture techniques to reduce your “government footprint”

Get off the Grid

Utility companies are often state owned, or at the very least take advantage of arbitrary property titles and monopoly status. Earth ships are around the same price as regular houses but have the benefit of having no electric or water bills. The buildings are designed to generate the electricity they need to operate and have their own water supply, both completely independent of the local utility company. Decentralized energy generation is achieved with a combination of solar and wind generation, along with building position, and insulation. Rainwater collected and purified in cisterns and ground based well water provide a source of water independent of the state economy.

Another great benefit of the earth ship is that it is constructed largely of recycled material, IE material that you can get for free, again avoiding the tax burden.

Quit Your Job.

Working in the state run economy enables the state to tax your income and manufacture your consent in a number of government programs including Social Security Insurance, Medicare, and Affordable Health care Act (ObamaCare). The government has an interest in having you believing that you can’t make a living without a job. It is not true. Take cue’s from illegal immigrants in the US; working under the table for cash. Freelance work is available in writing, coding, and graphic design. Self employment work in construction, painting, pressure washing, landscaping, and other handyman skills can be used for cash. This income is supposed to be reported to the state, but if it is paid in cash or bitcoins, how will the authorities ever know?

Peaceful Duplication

Since the IP debate has been settled for sometime, another way to not spend money so as to keep resources out of the hands of the State and corporations that benefit from state enforced intellectual poverty (in this case, media, broadcasting, film, and music industries, and patent war profiteers Apple and Microsoft) is to use bittorrent or other file sharing networks to download content. Almost any digital information can be acquired; music, films, ebooks, and computer programs.

Ditch Consumerism

Part of the agorist lifestyle is to spend as little money as possible in the state economy. That means becoming a producer. Still, there will be many things that can not currently be gotten through the informal economy (although most things can be bought used at least). Live frugally and avoid planned obsolescence. One example is using a straight razor instead of disposables (Alternatives to disposable consumer products).

Posted in AnarchObjectivism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

An AnarchObjectivist’s Guide to Atlas Shrugged

Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand is the story of a group of anarcho-capitalists, led by inventor John Galt, who struggle against and eventually destroy the state and its allies in business. The anarcho-capitalists establish a private voluntaryist association, which they call Galt’s Gulch that they use as a secret base for their attacks on the state and state economy. One method the group uses is the revolutionary libertarian ideology known as agorism. The second method used by the anarcho-capitalists is the more traditional anarchist tactic of direct action. The underlying principle of the anarchists action is the removal of consent of the governed.

In Atlas Shrugged the anarcho-capitalists establish a private voluntaryist association called Galt’s Gulch. Voluntaryism is a libertarian philosophy that holds that all forms of human association should be voluntary. Typically, voluntaryists use the non-aggression principle as a basis for their political positions.

Explaining the volutaryist values of Galt’s Gulch, anarcho-capitalist Midas Mulligan says, “We are not a state here, not a society of any kind – we’re just a voluntary association of men held together by nothing but every man’s self-interest. I own the valley and I sell the land to the others, when they want it. Judge Narragansett is to act as our arbiter, in case of disagreements. He hasn’t had to be called upon, as yet. They say that it’s hard for men to agree. You’d be surprised how easy it is – when both parties hold as their moral absolute that neither exists for the sake of the other and that reason is their only means of trade.”

John Galt further expresses support for the non-aggression principle in his speech, saying “Whatever may be open to disagreement, there is one act of evil that may not, the act that no man may commit against others and no man may sanction or forgive. So long as men desire to live together, no man may initiate—do you hear me? no man may start—the use of physical force against others.”

The primary tactic the anarcho-capitalists use to fight against the state is the revolutionary libertarian ideology agorism (referred to in Atlas Shrugged as “The Strike”) developed by libertarian philosopher Samuel Edward Konkin III. Konkin outlined his philosophy in the 1980 book “The New Libertarian Manifesto.” The Anarcho-capitalists of Atlas Shrugged highlight the issue of consent of the governed (referred to as “the sanction of the victim”) which they use as a theoretical basis for their agoristic ideology. On the topic of agorist theory, John Galt says, “I am speaking to those of you who desire to live and to recapture the honor of their soul. Now that you know the truth of the world, stop supporting your own destroyers. The evil of the world is mode possible by nothing but the sanction you give it. Withdraw your sanction. Withdraw your support. Do not try to live on your enemies’ terms or to win at a game where they’re setting the rules. Do not seek the favor of those who enslave you, do not beg for alms from those who have robbed you, be it subsidies, loans, or jobs, do not join their team to recoup what they’ve taken by helping them rob your neighbors.”

“[Agorism] advocates the goal of bringing about a society in which all relations between people are voluntary exchanges by means of counter-economics. Agorists [employ] such methods as education, direct action, alternative currencies, entrepreneurship, self sufficiency and most importantly counter-economics.” The heroes of Atlas Shrugged employ all of these methods to lead to the destruction of the state.

  • Education: The Strikers meet with prominent industry leaders to encourage them to strike and/or take their companies out of the state economy.
  • Alternate currency: “That’s the money we use here,” he said. “It’s minted by Midas Mulligan… We don’t accept any other currency in this valley.”
  • Autarky: Most of the strikers, formerly leading high class lifestyles as industrial CEO’s, became farmers. Energy independence achieved through decentralized use of Galt’s Motor. Midas Mulligan: “The valley is almost self-supporting.”
  • Black markets: As opposed to state markets, the strikers go out of their way to avoid material support of the state. Midas Mulligan: “And as to the goods that we can’t yet produce, I purchase them from the outside through a pipe line of my own. It’s a special agent, a man who does not let my money reach the looters.”
  • Disregard of illegitimate law: Wherever the state is blind and relies on voluntary adherence to its demands, the strikers are oblivious to it. In their secret Galt within the geographical boundaries of Colorado and the United States, nobody volunteers taxes or submission to regulatory bodies.

The heroes of Atlas Shrugged also employed direct action against the state and its allies. Examples include:

  • Ellis Wyatt’s destruction of state-appropriated “Wyatt Oil” fields.
  • Francisco D’Anconia’s sabotage of D’Anconia Copper and manipulation of the stock market to intentionally destroy the profits through political graft of American crony capitalists as well as his destruction of D’Anconia Copper on the day it was nationalized.
  • Ragnor Danneskjold’s destruction of state-owned cargo vessels and the factory of crony capitalist Orren Boyle of Associated Steel.
  • Midas Mulligan’s theft of state property and redistribution of funds to the taxpayers.
  • John Galt’s takeover of public broadcasting for dissemination of an anti-statist message.
  • The anarchists’ assault on the government facility, the “State Science Institute,” involving the execution of a government employee, for the purpose of liberating John Galt who was being held as a political prisoner.
Posted in AnarchObjectivism | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment