Libertarian opponents of anarchy are attacking a straw…
““Libertarian opponents of anarchy are attacking a straw man. Their arguments are usually utilitarian in nature and amount to "but anarchy won’t work" or "we need the (things provided by the) state." But these attacks are confused at best, if not disingenuous. To be an anarchist does not mean you think anarchy will "work" (whatever that means); nor that you predict it will or "can" be achieved. It is possible to be a pessimistic anarchist, after all. To be an anarchist only means that you believe that aggression is not justified, and that states necessarily employ aggression. And, therefore, that states, and the aggression they necessarily employ, are unjustified. It’s quite simple, really. It’s an ethical view, so no surprise it confuses utilitarians. Accordingly, anyone who is not an anarchist must maintain either: (a) aggression is justified; or (b) states (in particular, minimal states) do not necessarily employ aggression.””
About This Quote
This interpretation was drafted with AI assistance. It is one reading of the quote, not the author's own explanation.
Anarchism opposes state aggression; attacks claim it must work, but anarchists view aggression itself as unjustified.
In simple terms: Anarchists reject state aggression; not all support anarchy’s practicality.
Key Takeaway
Question the moral basis of state force.
Themes
politics
anarchism
ethics
state power
Mood
analytical
critical
Type
Agression:1
Anarchism:1
Anarchist:1
Anarchy:1
Nap:0
Pessimistic Anarchist:0
Think Anarchy:0
Anarchy Work:0
Accordingly Anarchist:0
When to use this quote
- debate
- policy critique
- activism
Key Concepts
aggression
justice
philosophy
Questions to Reflect On
- Is aggression ever justified?
- How do you envision non‑aggressive governance?
A Different Perspective
Anarchist views are diverse; not all share same tactics.