I am an Anarchist.

I believe in absolute individual liberty. Everybody believes in liberty for themselves, but only the Anarchist believes in universal liberty. The Anarchist believes in liberty as the principle of right action. Restrictions react to the detriment of all. If all men are born free and equal, with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, as our Declaration of Independence affirms, it seems to me the only logical position is that of the Anarchist. In the light of Herbert Spencer’s exposition of his researches, we know that government was never organized to secure these rights to men; but was born of aggression and lives by aggression. The Anarchist’s proposition that government is essentially an invasion is too self-evident to deny. Then we have the right, according to the Declaration of Independence, to alter or abolish government.

It is a matter of self-protection that moves government to stamp out Anarchy. It was a bad oversight in the author of the Declaration of Independence to advocate such revolutionary doctrines. I can understand why the politician has such a horror of Anarchy. He doesn’t want to loose his job; and the press and pulpit conservators of fashion and custom dread a change. But for the citizen or subject of government, I must believe that their opposition is due entirely to their ignorance of its principles.

The Anarchist is only the consistent advocate of liberty, equality, and fraternity. Their liberty is not a mere party shout, not a watchword to be placed upon battle flags. It is a principle applicable to human nature. Their equality is the logical conclusion that all men were born free and equal, hence all authority over one’s fellows must be a usurpation—a crime. Their fraternity proceeds from their liberty and equality. There can be no perfect love except between equals. It matters not if it be based upon the fatherhood of God, or upon the thesis of Evolution.

I am an Individualist.

Of course, being an Anarchist, and rejecting all authority, I regard the individual as supreme; and I hold it to be his right to do whatsoever he wills at his own cost. There would be very little invasion under freedom. It is government that teaches men to invade. I deny the proposition of the State Socialist that the individual is indebted to the community, as Mr. Joseph Wood puts it: We talk about our right to our own? What is our own? We are bankrupts every one except by the grace of the community, and our one right is the right to serve. What wonder Herbert Spencer should write of Socialism as the coming slavery. Community, society, government, God,—words to conjure with, but as meaningless as the social organism. It is the individual we can serve, injure or benefit. Individuals create wealth and individuals should enjoy it. Commonwealth as an institution would enslave the individual, yet I would have wealth in common.

I am a Communist.

I believe that liberty and equality will usher in a fraternity that will annihilate commercialism and the greed of gain. With the land and opportunity free, the laborer will no longer work for others, but supply his own needs with his labor. With the wonderful facilities for manufacturing, the immense aids inventive genius has placed at our disposal, but usurped by government agents, every man could be independent, and the fear of poverty would be unknown, the incentive to accumulate wealth for any other purpose than use, would be gone. Rent, interest, and profit would pass away. It is a mistake to suppose that money consideration of itself is an incentive to labor or invention. When competition dies, emulation will survive. When men labor for the love of their works, art and beauty will be in evidence.

I am an Egoist.

I believe the motive of every action is the satisfaction of self, self-protection, self-advancement, and the glory of man is self-reliance and self-maintenance. This principle of selfishness has brought man up from brutehood to manhood, from ignorant self to intelligent self, from gluttony to epicureunism. He that conquereth himself is greater than he that taketh a city. Let man govern himself.

I am an Evolutionist.

I believe in those laws so ably presented by Darwin and others, the struggle for existence and survival of the fittest. In the realms of Nature these laws were relentless before reason dawned. Man’s intelligence gave evolution a new direction. Competition had ruthlessly destroyed the unfit. With reason mercy tempered the law. With man’s advancement the unfit was to be gradually made fit, not thru altruistic motives, but association engendered sympathy, and it became a pleasure to advance the unfortunate. Commercialism has greatly retarded this sentiment. There is no friendship in trade; and yet love has proved a mighty factor in civilization.

The Anarchist is scientific.

It is a well known fact that our leading scientists are largely Anarchistic. Science and literature are our greatest allies. Science has destroyed the power of religious authority; and it will surely undermine the State. Inductive reason from fundamental facts will prove man’s sovereignty of self. All forceful authority is a fraud, a usurpation and a crime. When man assumes to be his brothers keeper he invariably developes a tyrant. No two can see alike or think alike. Hence when one governs, the other is forced against his will, which renders one a tyrant and the other a slave. Again there is a principle in human nature and it may be seen thruout the animal kingdom—that rebels against authority. A still small voice, assures us we are free, we want no governor, and liberty like love worketh no ill.

[7]But Anarchy is dangerous! Yes; dangerous to vested wrongs; dangerous to illgotten gains; but a bow to humanity. For Anarchy means peace.

And Anarchists have killed governors It is true that under the name men have struck back at sovereign authority; but it in nowise invalidates the truth and beauty of Anarchy. Where an Anarchist has taken one life, government has killed millions. It is ludicrous to hear the governmentalist prate of force on the part of Anarchists. Anarchists do not advocate force, and tolerate it only in self-defense. Anarchism means brotherhood, a dwelling together in unity. Anarchism means liberty, equality, and fraternity.

A. LeRoy Loubal