Attribute to The Libertarian Enterprise
I make my views about "anarchy" and "anarchist" explicit in my TLE
letter More on "A
Personal Journey..."
- I do not see myself or define myself in terms of negatives,
such as things that I am against. Rather, I define myself by
positives, by what I am for, what I advocate. I place very
little importance on being known as an anarchist or an atheist.
Both "an-archist" and "a-theist" areby definition
negative positions in their respective fields and I prefer to
emphasize positives. Being against Statism does not
automatically make a person in favor of freedom nor provide the
knowledge needed to be free, nor the structure of a free
society.
- I am not so much an atheist as I am an advocate of reason,
and I am not so much an anarchist as I am an advocate of the
Covenant of Unanimous Consent. As it happens, being an advocate
of reason and of the Covenant also fits within the definitions
of atheist and anarchist, but not all atheists are rational or
even pretend to be, and not all anarchists are Signatories to
the Covenant of Unanimous Consent or even want to be.
However, I have recently had my mind changed by Glen Allport regarding
using and defending the term "anarchist". In an
article at Strike the Root, dated 2006-Dec-18, (which
was finally called to my attention 2 years later) he presents an
EXCELLENT CASE for choosing another term to describe my general
political position (which, of course, is broader than my
specific political position which is Signatory: Covenant of
Unanimous Consent).
Perhaps he can change your mind also. His article is at
http://www.strike-the-root.com/62/allport/allport4.html
Henceforth, Call Me an Abolitionist, Please
*All due respects to Glen Allport and his article with the same title.