“…The basic principle which leads a libertarian from statism to his free society is the same which the founders of libertarianism used to discover the theory itself. That principle is consistency. Thus, the consistent application of the theory of libertarianism to every action the individual libertarian takes creates the libertarian society. Many thinkers have expressed the need for consistency between means and ends and not all were libertarians. Ironically, many statists have claimed inconsistency between laudable ends and contemptible means; yet when their true ends of greater power and oppression were understood, their means are found to be quite consistent. It is part of the statist mystique to confuse the necessity of ends-means consistency; it is thus the most crucial activity of the libertarian theorist to expose inconsistencies…” – Samuel Edward Konkin III, from New Libertarian Manifesto [Emphasis added]
Consistency is something that should be highly valued by those within the libertarian/anarchist community. A lot of “us” spend most of “our” time pointing out inconsistencies and contradictions within statist lines of thought. That said, some just simply don’t practice what they preach.
I’ve witnessed “anarchist politicians,” I’ve been a pragmatic witness to those who claim to value liberty advocating for political rulers, and possibly worse, I’ve seen too many who proclaim the ideology exercise the inability or complete negligence in taking any action to truly live their principles in their own lives.
It’s quite disconcerting, and as someone who now focuses on methodology and strategy to increase personal liberty, I find their bad example completely reprehensible.
Modern anarchism is missing something crucial in this digital age, and the remedy I am proposing is the technique of libertarian role-modeling. Simply put, I mean highlighting individuals who choose to live these principles of non-aggression and self-ownership consistently in their own lives through their words as well as their actions.
On the other hand, it is also important to highlight bad behavior (that is, bad role-modeling) as case studies of what not to do.
Examples of Bad Libertarian Role-Modeling
The first example that comes to mind is Dr. Tom Woods. I’ll first say that I really enjoy Dr. Woods when it comes to Austrian economics and history; he’s a very entertaining, eloquent speaker and I do think he has great things to offer on the aforementioned subjects.
That said, he is a big advocate of state nullification, which requires the use of reformist means (otherwise known as “working inside the system”). Being a believer in the fact that running for office and voting are acts of aggression, I view this advocacy as inconsistent with libertarian/anarchist principles, not to mention the wasted time, effort, and money that goes along with the political means.
Next is Christopher Cantwell, host of the Radical Agenda podcast. I listened to his show for most of 2015, mainly due to his work on pointing out the hypocrisies and the dangers of the social justice warrior movement. That said, he has been an ardent supporter of Donald Trump for President. Clearly, this is an example of bad role-modeling.
That same reason also applies to Dr. Walter Block, a well-known Austrian economist. As with Woods, Dr. Block’s work in the field of economics is nothing short of spectacular, especially his masterful debunking of the gender pay gap myth. Although, there are two major concerns; first off, he does recommend that anarchists vote for the “most libertarian candidate.” That’s even before he started Libertarians for Trump. As much as I despise any and all political rulers, Trump is surely not the “most libertarian candidate.”
Lastly, is Ian Bernard, Free State Project (FSP) member and host of Free Talk Live. Since he is in the FSP, it’s expected of him to be involved in the political means. That said, the main issue at hand with Bernard is his support of (now former) “anarchist politician”, Tim O’Flaherty, and those that followed. The implications of this are profound, as he is dragging consistent anarchism through the muddy, inefficacious political means.
As you can tell from those examples, all of them advocate for the failed reformist means, in one way or another. It would be one thing if they had openly advocated for “restoring the Republic,” as the minarchist Oathkeepers and Three Percenters have done, but such is not the case here with these practitioners of cafeteria libertarianism, which is the desire to unendingly edit and alter the philosophy of liberty to suit their own special interest agendas. Yes, all of these folks may have good things to offer, but the inconsistency within their claimed ideology is something worth calling out.
Examples of Great Libertarian Role-Modeling
Kal Molinet, founder of Liberate RVA, has been consistently living his principles for years now. His YouTube playlist, “Spreading Anarchy”, has provided voluntaryists the rhetoric necessary to successfully defeat statist arguments. He has also brought over a hundred anarchists together in Richmond, in hopes of being able to “outgrow the State,” and consistently rebukes all means of working inside the system. Molinet’s example is one worthy of emulation.
The next example is Brett Veinotte, a former teacher within the government schools. Veinotte abandoned his post after seeing the true intent of public schooling: indoctrination and brainwashing. He is the founder of the School Sucks podcast, which encourages students to leave the government schools, in pursuit of real education.
Next on the list, is Dr. Stephanie Murphy, an entrepreneur and host of the Let’s Talk Bitcoin! and PorcTherapy podcasts. Stephanie resides in New Hampshire, but she is no longer a member of the Free State Project. In “our” interview with her, she outright repudiated the FSP and instead advocated the economic means.
In regards to the economic means, she is a yoga instructor and is knowledgeable about psychotherapy and journaling, all of which fall under the Freedom Umbrella of Direct Action. She also started an entrepreneurial venture called Stephanie Murphy Voice, in which she provides her voice professionally for audiobooks, show introductions, and more.
Stephanie’s work in the libertarian community is quite extensive and there is sure to be more in the future. Her example is certainly one worthy of emulation.
One more case study is worth mentioning: Larken Rose. Here is a man who has specifically denounced reformism, and whose reputation is still above reproach, at least, until the FSP board of trustees, at the insistence of none other than Ian Bernard, decided to investigate Larken for his public advocacy of individual self-defense, particularly against government police. Larken, as a role model, has never sacrificed libertarian principles for the sake of reformist expediency, and for that, he has my most heartfelt respect.
Other Ways to Live Your Principles
More generally, what are other ways that you can emulate libertarianism? First off, you should not advocate for the utilization of the political means—that includes voting, running for public office, and state nullification, among others. Secondly, you should never use or advocate for initiatory force, especially by way of government law to solve your problems, such as legitimizing the victimless “crime” of copyright infringement by filing DMCA claims on YouTube.
Next, in the words of Michael Dean, don’t hurt anyone and honor your contracts. If you say you are going to be somewhere or that you are going to do something, do it or be there.
Also, examine how you treat other people in your life. This could include friends, family, and normal day laborers. Are you treating them with love, kindness, and respect? How do you act in front of children? Are you setting a good example?
Just as important as doing this is not doing other things that directly aid tyranny. Government employment is arguably the most anti-libertarian action possible, for not only does it legitimize the State, but the practical consequences are very real and often immediate, in much the same way buying government bonds is. Therefore, the very minimum of integrity that ought to be demanded from those espousing libertarian values is for them to not directly profit from government employment.
Considering all of the options within the free market, there is little excuse, if any, for those who proselytize libertarian theory, but then subsequently voluntarily engage in statist practices. It is one thing to live as freely as possible without committing civil disobedience because of the coerciveness of “the law” itself, yet willfully propping up the authoritarian structure is blatantly hypocritical, and unbelievably so when such advocacy is done in the very name of libertarianism. A truly free society can only be built by innovative entrepreneurs, not by “theoreticians” or “activists” who can’t wait to unabashedly contradict themselves at every given opportunity.
To conclude, the way that you act either justifies or disproves the philosophy. Are you consistently emulating libertarianism, or are you acting in a contradictory manner? The answer to this question will determine your next step.
This article was originally published on the Liberty Under Attack website on October 29th, 2015, and has been re-written for publication here. Part 2 will be published momentarily.
Shane is the founder of Liberty Under Attack and host of LUA Radio, a live show that airs every Thursday and Sunday at 7pm CST on the Freedom Phalanx Radio Network. He is a free market anarchist committed to providing solutions to his listeners and readers, so that they can create the freedom they desire in their own lives, RIGHT NOW, despite the State.