Friday, May 8, 2009

an anarchist's zen

an anarchist's declaration, -- a website i am partial to (surprise). note the wise avoidance of the plural form.

a further endorsement from wilton alston, a thinker i am also partial to.

first let me say that i find these agreeable sentiments, and, for the most part, also live by them, making us praxeologically compatible citizens to each other (despite any government or belief of a government in a society, including self-government, our relationships would in theory be fully anarchist).

how do you fellows handle the problem of children?

is there no power relationship between parent and child at any point in time? or is it a permanent power relationship? or can it be moved in and out of, through time? if it does exist, can it be justified by the resistance clause? is emancipation of the child the ultimate purpose of all family interaction? and so on.

what plagues me is not this problem in and of itself: what plagues me is that it arises phenomenally from putting this sentiment into words.

nothing further.


  1. Hiya, Jon! Thanks for the linkage and commentary, certainly I love the blog name, too :)

    Accepting rights dialogue as useful, the anarchist sentiments toward moral equality and against privilege lead me to assert that children have exactly the same right as everyone else does.

    I forget the source, but I know Rothbard addressed this somewhere by saying, in effect, that a young person's right to self-determination and, therefore, emancipation from parents, for whatever reason, ought be recognized as soon as s/he expresses the will to be emancipated.

    Additionally, of course, any posture that treats a young person as parent's property is unacceptable.

  2. i will look for this. thanks.