Free America

The grand strategy of a nonviolent struggle is the master concept of the struggle, answering the question, “How are we going to win?” Here are some ideas I have for that grand strategy. The American freedom movement currently lacks the strength to effectively implement most of these ideas; however, now is the time to discuss such ideas, so that we know what to aim for.

I discussed some of these ideas at Beyond Ballots or Bullets, in a talk entitled Rule-of-law Anarchism: A Strategy for Destroying the State’s Legitimacy. I’ll just summarize that talk here; you can follow the link for the details.

The idea is to attack the American state by attacking their authority. We promote the message that the state is a lawless organization, both in the particulars of its members’ behavior (think Waco, the wiretapping scandal, etc.) and in its very essence. In fact, the very notion of the sovereign state is incompatible with two basic principles of rule of law. One of these is isonomy, or the principle that both the content and procedures of law are to apply equally to all, with no special immunities or privileges for any group of people. This is summarized in Jefferson’s phrase, “All men are created equal.” The other is the ancient legal principle that “no man should be judge in his own case.”

In practice, this means that we should publicly reject any privileged position for the state. When officers and agents of the state commit some outrage, we should bring suit against them—and demand that the case be tried by an independent third party, not by the state’s own courts. Likewise, when the state charges someone with a crime, it thereby becomes the plaintiff in the case, and cannot legitimately supply the court that will try the case.

To destroy the state’s authority we must provide a replacement authority: a centerless legal system. Therefore, we also need to promote the use of private courts (e.g., existing arbitration services) over the government’s courts in resolving civil disputes, and even in criminal cases (by pursuing restorative justice over penal justice).

Looking at this another way, our struggle against the state is a problem of crime control: there is one organization whose members routinely get away with committing serious crimes against the rest of us. Our problem is that we have no effective legal apparatus (and associated enforcement mechanisms) to deal with crimes committed by officers and agents of the state. We need a legal system not controlled by the state; once this system achieves widespread legitimacy, effective enforcement mechanisms will then become possible.

In addition to the above ideas, I would add these as part of the grand strategy:

• Weaning ourselves from the state. Dependence is vulnerability, and so we should seek to avoid depending on the state for anything. We don’t want to depend on the state for crime prevention, law enforcement, education, consumer protection, etc. We should also seek alternatives to their (adulterated) currency. We want to get to the point where we don’t care what the state does—whether they waste money on foolish expenditures, inflate their currency, or teach arrant nonsense in their schools—as long as they leaves us alone.
• Organizing for large-scale civil disobedience. If enough people disobey an unjust government edict, it becomes very difficult to enforce—only a small fraction of the resisters can be targeted for prosecution. If the resisters insure each other against prosecution, that risk can become manageable.
• Organizing without a center. A movement with no central leadership is difficult to target for destruction. I envision many independent, local activist groups swapping ideas and coordinating efforts. And seriously—as libertarians, what other sort of organization suits us?

I’d like to elaborate the goal I stated in my previous post. For reference, here it is again:

By January 1, 2025, every American who is determined to live free shall do so. Those who are content with their chains are welcome to keep them, but we who must be free will have our own centerless legal system and civil society that are not subject to any state.

Let’s examine this in more detail.

1. “…every American…”

That is, any person who makes their home in America. For the sake of concreteness, we’ll define this region as the territory claimed by the 50 states of the United States of America. (See “Why Just America?”)

2. “…who is determined…”

It is possible that individuals will have to pay some price or make some nontrivial effort to achieve their freedom; for example, they may have to formally renounce all claims to services or benefits provided by the United States and its auxiliaries.

3. “…to live free…”

This refers to freedom in the libertarian sense, based on the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP). The NAP states that it is always criminal to initiate the use of force against the person or property of another. Among other things, this implies that taxation, conscription, seizure of property by eminent domain, and the “war on drugs” are all criminal activities. To live free then means that one is not subject to any institutionalized aggression and that one may have reasonable confidence that, as long as one does not initiate the use of force against others, none shall forcibly interfere in one’s own life.

4. “Those who are content with their chains are welcome to keep them…”

We will not attempt to free anyone who does not desire to be free.

5. “…we … will have our own centerless legal system … not subject to any state”

A central tenet of the rule of law is isonomy: the structure and content of the legal system must apply equally to all. No person or organization shall hold any special, privileged legal position. None shall have any special immunity or exemption from the laws that apply to all others. None shall have any special legal privileges denied others. Taken to its logical conclusion, the principle of isonomy is incompatible with any notion of a supreme authority—whether that be an individual or organization—that holds an exclusive right to declare what is law, to interpret the law, or to enforce the law.

Thus, we will have competing free-market courts, and competing free-market crime protection. Plaintiff and defendant together will choose the court that tries their case, e.g., via a prior agreement, by negotiation, or by having each choose an arbiter and having the two arbiters choose a third to serve as tie-breaker if necessary. As has historically been the case in stateless legal systems, as well as in the common law, there will be no need of a legislature—the specifics of the law emerge from the body of cases tried.

In particular, this means that the American state can no longer be sovereign. Their power must be weakened, and the power of civil society strengthened, until the American state find themselves obliged to submit to the law on the same basis as all others. If some officer of the state charges a Free American with a crime or tort, the case will be tried by an impartial third party, agreed to by both sides, in the same fashion as any other legal dispute—and the plaintiff will have to show that an actual injury to someone’s person or property has occurred. Likewise, it shall be possible to bring charges against and collect restitution from officers and employees of the state should they aggress against any Free American, in the same fashion as would occur for any other tort or criminal complaint, with neither the state as an organization nor its members accorded any special legal privilege.

6. “…and civil society … not subject to any state.”

We will be able to

• buy from merchants who are not subject to any state and therefore do not collect sales tax for them;
• seek employment from businesses that are not subject to any state and therefore do not collect payroll taxes for them;
• buy and sell using a free-market currency not controlled by any state;
• store our money in banks that are not subject to any state and therefore do not collect financial information for them;
• send our children to schools unregulated by any state;
• travel using means of transportation (including roads and highways) not controlled by any state;
• communicate (phone, email, etc.) using means not monitored, regulated, or controlled by any state;
• and so on.

In other words, the American state, should this network of organizations continue to exist in some form, will cease to be a true state, as they will only have power over those who choose to accept their rule.

By January 1, 2025, every American who is determined to live free shall do so. Those who are content with their chains are welcome to keep them, but we who must be free will have our own centerless legal system and civil society that are not subject to any state.

This website and blog are dedicated to making the above goal a reality. I’ve been a market anarchist for about twenty years, but I haven’t been much of an activist, for one simple reason: I didn’t see anything I could do that had a reasonable chance of making a real difference. That changed when I encountered Gene Sharp’s writings on the technique of nonviolent struggle. For the first time, I saw the possibility of a plan that could actually lead to the free society in which I wanted to live.

So in October 2006 I began planning and publicizing a freedom activist workshop entitled Beyond Ballots or Bullets: Creating a Free America. I also wrote a series of articles for Strike the Root, beginning with “Creating a Free America”. Nineteen people attended the BBB workshop in March 2007, and there were ten presentations given. I gave an overview of the technique of nonviolent struggle and discussed a proposed grand strategy for this struggle.

And then a family crisis erupted that consumed all of my attention for most of a year. This entire project lay fallow during this time. I’m still not out of the woods yet on the family situation, but it’s clear to me that the time to act is now, so I’ve resolved to do what it takes to move this project forward.

One idea that emerged from the BBB workshop was the need for a decentralized organization: many independent local activist groups cooperating, sharing ideas, and coordinating their efforts. Such an organization makes it harder for the state to suppress the movement, as there is no head to cut off; it also is a natural fit for libertarians. Along with promoting the use of nonviolent direct action among freedom activists, I intend for this blog and website to become a resource for such groups.