I have been posting about popular statist retorts or arguments, and this is another big one. They accuse us of supporting the State, or of being hypocrites, because we use State “services” like the roads. It is quite true that we use these “services”: not just the roads, but the currency, the water system, the sewer system, the telephone, grocery stores, and so on and so forth. But it does not at all prove that Anarchists are hypocrites.
Let me use an example to illustrate this. Suppose I kidnap someone, lock him up in my basement, and starve him for two days. If he then accepts a glass of water from me, does that mean he supports his kidnapping?
Now I grant you that this example is not perfect. Obviously we have some choice in where we live (although not nearly as much as the statists like to claim, as no State in the world recognizes people’s freedom of movement), so our situation is not the same as kidnapping. I grant this. But my fundamental point in making this analogy is that this situation is a creation of the State, not our creation or desire. We are born encased within a structure of monopolies directed by the biggest monopoly of all, government. If we participate, it is because we need to survive within that structure.
Obviously the statists want us to become hermits in order to be Anarchists. But this is obviously irrelevant. Being an Anarchist does not indicate how someone lives, but what someone believes. True, Anarchists do point to a better way of life for the people of the world, but unfortunately it is not achievable at present time.
So what should we do? Just give up on the truth because it is impractical or complicated? Stupid people do that. That’s what faith is all about: giving up on the truth because it is impractical or complicated, and believing in something simple and practical, even if it is, in reality, a castle in the sky filled with immorality and lies. People who are honest with themselves and who care at all about living a good life don’t take refuge in these lies. They face the truth no matter what.
The desire to be an Anarchist in this world that is full of indoctrination and lies is the desire to stand up for oneself and be an individual who adheres to the truth. What’s the point of being an individual if we can’t disagree with the lies we’re being fed on a daily basis? We look up to people who seek the truth, and we despise people who try to escape it.
We don’t consider ourselves hypocrites for living in this world. Everyone lives in this world. The world, politically speaking, is sinking into democratic slavery. We can do nothing about that fact. We can, however, do our damned best to wake up some people in our own little part of the world and try to make an alternate society for ourselves, so that at least we can live a little more free.
The statist answer is “if you don’t like it, move.” As Anarchists, we hate the State, and as such we have nowhere else to move to. Not only that, but we don’t want to move. We want to change things for the better where we are, because we like the societies we live in. If we believed in America and what it represents, why would we flee it when it’s being taken over by imperialist greed?
I don’t understand how could a patriot could say “if you don’t like it, move.” Must his country be perfect for him to accept it? Fine patriot he is! He is, rather, a yellow coward who refuses to confront facts, he is a rat who refuses to think for his country. I know I’m asking a lot of hypothetical questions here, but what’s the point of believing in something if you refuse to help it when something goes wrong?
Are we hypocrites for speaking out against an evil while refusing to leave its place of origin? Let me use another analogy here. Suppose I go to someone’s house, and I happen to be near the bedroom, where I see that he is beating his wife. I then tell him to stop and how horrible this is, and he replies “if you don’t like it, get the fuck out! This is my house!”
Is this an acceptable reply? If this is not an acceptable reply, why is it acceptable when we speak against one’s government? Why is it acceptable to reject criticism of the ruling class by demanding that the critics leave the whole country ruled by that ruling class, when they are found guilty of beating their own subjects, kidnapping them, or killing them?
We Anarchists are in fact the greatest patriots of all. We Anarchists are the most courageous of all. We dare to speak out against the crimes committed by the State against its subjects. We dare to side for our society against its enemies, even though the enemies have taken over. Because of that, we’re considered hypocrites. Basically, what we are asked to do is to accept the state of things, and to never demand fundamental change, because this is how things are and this is how things will always be.
One last hypothetical question: do you think the supporters of the monarchs said the same thing?