New Libertarian Manifesto 15 I. STATISM: OUR CONDITION We are coerced by our fellow human beings. Since they have the ability to choose to do oth- erwise, our condition need not be thus. Coer- cion is immoral, inefficient, and unnecessary for human life and fulfillment. Those who wish to be supine as their neighbors prey on them are free to so choose; this manifesto is for those who choose otherwise: to fight back. To combat coercion, one must understand it. More important, one must understand what one is fighting for as much as what one is fight- ing against. Blind reaction goes in all direc- tions negative to the source of oppression and disperses opportunity; pursuit of a common goal focuses the opponents and allows forma- tion of coherent strategy and tactics. Diffuse coercion is optimally handled by lo- cal, immediate self-defense. Though the mar- ket may develop larger-scale businesses for protection and restoration, random threats of violence can only be dealt with on the spot ad hoc.1 Organized coercion requires organized op- position. (An excellent case has been made many times by many thinkers that such orga- nization should remain skeletal at best, flesh- ing out only for actual confrontation, in order to prevent perversion of the defenders into an _____________________________________________ 1 I am indebted to Robert LeFevre for this insight, though we draw differing conclusions. 16 Samuel Edward Konkin III agency of aggression.) Institutional coercion, developed over the millennia with roots of mysticism and delusion planted deep in the victims’ thinking, requires a grand strategy and a cataclysmic point of historical singular- ity: Revolution. Such an institution of coercion—centralizing immorality, directing theft and murder, and coordinating oppression on a scale inconceiv- able by random criminality—exists. It is the Mob of mobs, Gang of gangs, Conspiracy of con- spiracies. It has murdered more people in a few recent years than all the deaths in history before that time; it has stolen in a few recent years more than all the wealth produced in history to that time; it has deluded—for its survival—more minds in a few recent years than all the irrationality of history to that time; Our Enemy, The State.2 In the 20th Century alone, war has mur- dered more than all previous deaths; taxes and inflation have stolen more than all wealth pre- viously produced; and the political lies, propa- ganda, and above all, “Education,” have twisted more minds than all the superstition prior: yet through all the deliberate confusion and obfuscation, the thread of reason has devel- oped fibers of resistance to be woven into the rope of execution for the State: Libertarian- ism. Where the State divides and conquers its opposition, Libertarianism unites and lib- erates. Where the State beclouds, Libertar- ianism clarifies; where the State conceals, Lib- _____________________________________________ 2 Thank you, Albert J. Nock, for that phrase. New Libertarian Manifesto 17 ertarianism uncovers; where the State par- dons, Libertarianism accuses. Libertarianism elaborates an entire phi- losophy from one simple premise: initiatory violence or its threat (coercion) is wrong (im- moral, evil, bad, supremely impractical, etc.) and is forbidden; nothing else is.3 Libertarianism, as developed to this point, discovered the problem and defined the solution: the State vs. the Market. The Market is the sum of all voluntary human action.4 If one acts non- coercively, one is part of the Market. Thus did Economics become a part of Libertarianism. Libertarianism investigated the nature of man to explain his rights deriving from non-co- ercion. It immediately followed that man (woman, child, Martian, etc.) had an absolute right to this life and other property—and no right to the life or property of others. Thus did Objec- tive philosophy become part of Libertarianism. Libertarianism asked why society was not libertarian now and found the State, its rul- ing class, its camouflage, and the heroic histo- rians striving to reveal the truth. Thus did Revisionist History become part of Libertari- anism. Psychology, especially as developed by Tho- mas Szasz as counter-psychology, was em- braced by libertarians seeking to free them- _____________________________________________ 3 Modern Libertarianism is best described by Murray Rothbard in For a New Liberty, which, regardless how recent the edition, is always a year or more out of date. Recommending even the best writing on libertarian- ism is like recommending one song to explain music in all its forms. 4 Thank you, Ludwig von Mises. 18 Samuel Edward Konkin III selves from both State restraint and self-im- prisonment. Seeking an art form to express the horror potential of the State and extrapolate the many possibilities of liberty, Libertarian- ism found Science Fiction already in that field. From political, economic, philosophical, psychological, historical, and artistic realms the partisans of liberty saw a whole, integrating their resistance with others elsewhere, and they came together as their consciousness became aware. Thus did Libertarians become a Movement. The Libertarian Movement looked around and saw the challenge: everywhere, Our En- emy, The State; from the ocean’s depth past arid desert outposts to the distant lunar sur- face; in every land, people, tribe, nation— and in the individual mind. Some sought immediate alliance with other opponents of the power elite to overthrow the State’s present rulers.5 Some sought immedi- ate confrontation with the State’s agents.6 Some pursued collaboration with those in power who offered less oppression in exchange for votes.7 And some dug in for long-term en- lightenment of the populace to build and de- velop the Movement.8 Everywhere, a Libertar- _____________________________________________ 5 Radical Libertarian Alliance, 1968–71. 6 Student Libertarian Action Movement, 1968–72, later revived briefly as a proto-MLL. 7 Citizens for a Restructured Republic, 1972, made up of RLA members disillusioned with revolution. 8 Society for Individual Liberty, 1969–89 (now merged with Libertarian International to the International So- ciety for Individual Liberty). Also Rampart College (now defunct) and the Foundation for Economic Education and Free Enterprise Institute, all of whom were around be- fore the libertarian population explosion of 1969. New Libertarian Manifesto 19 ian Alliance of activists sprang up.9 The State’s Higher Circles were not about to yield their plunder and restore property to their victims at the first sign of opposition. The first counterattack came from anti-principles already planted by the corrupt Intellectual Caste: Defeatism, Retreatism, Minarchism, Collaborationism, Gradualism, Monocentrism, and Reformism—including accepting State of- fice to “improve” Statism! All of these anti-prin- ciples (deviations, heresies, self-destructive contradictory tenets, etc.) will be dealt with later. Worst of all is Partyarchy, the anti-con- cept of pursuing libertarian ends through stat- ist means, especially political parties. A “Libertarian” Party was the second coun- terattack of the State unleased on the fledg- ling Libertarians, first as a ludicrous oxymo- ron,10 then as an invading army.11 _____________________________________________ 9 Most important, the California Libertarian Alliance, 1969–73. The name is still kept alive for sponsorship of conferences, and is also used in the United Kingdom. 10 The first “Libertarian” Party was set up by Gabriel Aguilar and Ed Butler in California in 1970 as a hollow shell to gain media access. (Aguilar, a Galambosian, was staunchly anti-political.) Even Nolan’s “L”P was mocked and scorned by such as Murray Rothbard in the first year of its existence. 11 The “Libertarian” Party that eventually organized nationally and ran John Hospers and Toni Nathan for President and Vice-President in 1972 was first orga- nized by David and Susan Nolan in December 1971 in Colorado. Dave Nolan was a Massachusetts YAFer who had broken with YAF back in 1967 and missed the 1969 climax at St. Louis. He remained conservative and minarchist right up to this first edition. Although the Nolans were rather innocent, and other early organization and candidates often so, the debate 20 Samuel Edward Konkin III The third counterattack was an attempt by one of the ten richest capitalists in the United States to buy the major Libertarian institu- tions—not just the Party—and run the move- ment as other plutocrats run all the other politi- cal parties in capitalist states.12 The degree of success those statist counter- attacks had in corrupting libertarianism led to a splintering of the Movement’s “Left” and _____________________________________________ on “the Party Question” began immediately. New Lib- ertarian Notes attacked the “L”P concept in Spring 1972 and ran a debate between Nolan and Konkin just be- fore the election (NLN 15). By the 1980 presidential campaign, the Nolans had broken with the “L”P leadership of Ed Crane and his candidate Ed Clark, who ran a high-powered, high-fi- nanced, traditional vote-chasing and platform-trimming campaign. 12 Charles G. Koch—Wichita oil billionaire—through his relatives, foundations, institutes, and centers, had set up, bought up, or “bought out” the following from 1976–79: Murray Rothbard and his Libertarian Forum; Libertarian Review (from Robert Kephart), edited by Roy A. Childs; Students for a Libertarian Society (SLS), run by Milton Mueller; Center for Libertarian Studies (Rothbard-leaning) and Joe Peden; Inquiry, edited by Williamson Evers; Cato Institute; and various Koch Funds, Foundations, and Institutes. Named the “Kochtopus” in New Libertarian 1 (February 1978), it was first attacked in print by Edith Efron in the con- servative-libertarian publication Reason, along with allegations of an “anarchist” conspiracy. The Movement of the Libertarian Left cut away from Efron’s anti-anarchist ravings and rushed to support her on her key revelat- ion of the growth of monocentrism in the Movement. In 1979, the Kochtopus took control of the national Libertarian party at the Los Angeles convention. David Koch, Charles’ brother, openly bought the VP nomina- tion for $500,000. New Libertarian Manifesto 21 the despairing paralyzation of others. As dis- illusionment grew with “Libertarianism,” the disillusioned sought answers to this new prob- lem: the State within as well as the State with- out. How do we avoid being used by the State and its power elite? That is, they asked, how can we avoid deviations from the path of lib- erty when we know there are more than one? The market has many paths to production and consumption of a product and none are per- fectly predictable. So even if one tells us how to get from here (statism) to there (liberty), how do we know that is the best way? Already some are dredging up the old strat- egies of movements long dead, movements with other goals. New paths are indeed being of- fered—back to the State.13 Betrayal, inadvertent or planned, continues. It need not. While no one can predict the sequence of steps that will unerringly achieve a free soci- ety for free-willed individuals, one can elimi- nate in one slash all those that will not ad- vance Liberty, and applying the principles of _____________________________________________ 13 Murray Rothbard broke with the Kochtopus soon after the ’79 LP Convention and most of his close allies were purged, such as Williamson Evers of Inquiry. CLS was cut off from Koch funding. The Libertarian Forum began attaching Koch. Rothbard and young Justin Rai- mondo set up a new “radical” caucus of the LP (the first one, 1972–74, was run by progenitors of NLA as a re- cruiting tactic and a way to destroy the Party from within). Although Rothbard was moved to ask “Is Sam Konkin Right?” in his July 1980 speech to an RC din- ner in Orange County, the RC strategy is to reform the LP using New Left and neo-Marxist tactics. 22 Samuel Edward Konkin III the Market unwaveringly will map out a terrain to travel. There is no One Way, one straight line graph to Liberty, to be sure. But there is a fam- ily of graphs, a Space filled with lines, that will take the libertarian to his goal of the free society, and that Space can be described. Once the goal is fixed and the paths dis- covered, only the Action of the individual to go from here to there remains. Above all, this manifesto calls for that Action.14 _____________________________________________ 14 I hope subsequent editions may omit this note, but in the present historical context it is vital to point out that Libertarianism is not specifically for the most “advanced” or enlightened elements of North America, perhaps typified by the young, white, highly read com- puter consultant, equally feminist mate (and 0.5 chil- dren). Only the freest market can raise the “Second” and “Third World” from grinding poverty and self-de- structive superstition. Compulsory attempts critically to raise production standards and associated cultural understanding have caused backlash and regression: e.g. Iran and Afghanistan. Mostly, the State has en- gaged in deliberate repression of self-improvement. Quasi-free markets, such as the freeports of Hong Kong, Singapore, and (earlier) Shanghai, attracted floods of upwardly mobile, highly motivated entrepreneurs. The incredibly well-developed black market of Burma already runs the entire economy and needs only a libertarian awareness to oust Ne Win and the Army, accelerating trade and annihilating poverty overnight. Similar observations are possible about developed black markets and tolerated semi-free markets in the “Second World” of Soviet occupation, such as Armenia, Georgia, and the Russian counter-economy (nalevo). Note to the Second Edition: The above note is still, sadly enough, needed. Note to the Third Edition: With the collapse of Commu- nism, maybe the need is declining, but the note’s still here!