The idea that some sort of revolution will/should take place for removing the State anywhere or everywhere and then all problems will be solved is extremely weak. All that would actually occur with a sudden violent removal of a government is what has always taken place in the past – a power vacuum and a rush by factions to fill it. The correct philosophical basis for what replaces the State must be understood and accepted, otherwise any glib talking politician-like individual can easily sway those whose grounding in mutually beneficial social interaction is weak or non-existent.

A self-ordering society of individuals interacting to mutual benefit, each with the goal of maximizing hir lifetime happiness (the purpose of each whether or not s/he recognizes that fact), is possible, even though the vast majority of the current world's populace thinks that governments are a necessity for any order to exist. Individual self-order *without* rule by others is the social system whose members are humans who have become *fully* adult. Just as people can become physical adults, so can they become social adults – if only they are allowed (and even required in the sense that they will not achieve their desires unless they do) to socially mature sufficiently. Understanding the social interaction methodology by which more individuals would progress to become fully socially mature adults requires a paradigm shift in thinking about human interactions. I invite – and even challenge – those who seek a society of individuals interacting to mutual benefit (or are maybe only curious at this point) to read "Social Meta-Needs: A New Basis for Optimal Human Interaction" ( http://selfsip.org/fundamentals/socialmetaneeds.h… and then review the twin frameworks of the Natural Social Contract ( http://selfsip.org/solutions/NSC.html ) and Social Preferencing ( http://selfsip.org/solutions/Social_Preferencing…. ), both of which flow from that basis.

Before liberty promoters anywhere take up arms against the government(s) claiming jurisdiction in their area, I strongly urge them to study Gene Sharp’s works on nonviolent political action. Selective (discriminating) association to exclude those who cause harm is a potentially very powerful method of non-violent action, referred to as ostracism by many down through the ages. It is included in Gene Sharp’s 2nd volume (of 3), “The Politics of Nonviolent Action”, Chapter 4, “The Methods of Social Noncooperation”. I and husband Paul Wakfer use the term “negative social preferencing” for purposeful non-voluntary association (contrasted with positive social preferencing towards those who do provide value) and have described how it is the ultimate effector of social order in a truly free society (The Freeman Society) – http://selfsip.org/solutions/Social_Preferencing.html

Although Sharp is not an anarchist and appears to be actually a statist of the democratic sort, all of his strategy and many of his methods can be employed by anti-statists in bringing about the withering of the State. His collection of strategies and tactics are a valuable resource for study by serious anti-statists. See his website that contains some of his writings and lists all of them – http://www.aeinstein.org/ His books are available in large bookstores and Amazon, and recent interviews of him can be found on the Internet.

Keep in mind that the enforcers of the State are comparatively few in number in relation to the entire populace. When large numbers of people in an area refuse to voluntarily associate with law/regulation/edict enforcers and the reasons made well known, some of them will resign their positions rather quickly. And if it is clear that the same negative social preferencing will be used towards any replacements, the total numbers of enforcers will begin to fall. It is not a quick process – it can not be if it is to be effective towards withering a social system that is still accepted by the majority as being necessary for an orderly society.

Maybe it’s because even Judges have families that could be injured as a result of such action. Or maybe it’s that society rightly considers arson to be a dangerous and criminal act. Behaving like a thug in opposition to state thuggery just results in more damage being done to our world, and I find it worrying that you would endorse such things.

Creating alternative systems of mutual support that will be sustainable in a post statist world is the best and only route to achieving a positive change that is lasting. Build a new society within the shell of the old.

It also amazes me how many sanctimonious judges can live in wood frame houses in communities with people they have ordered be kidnapped, gang raped, caged, and tortured. Gasoline continues to be cheap and plentiful, and Molotov showed many techniques for introducing it to buildings, armored vehicles, etc. (For my own part, I like five parts gasoline, one part motor oil, one part brake fluid. Tampon to seal, very cheap (dollar store) clothesline to fuse. Zima bottles seem especially easy to break. YMMV)

A government powerful enough to take care of everyone’s needs is powerful enough to destroy everyone’s lives.

Wow. Selling orchids – a completely harmless thing – and creating clean energy – not only completely harmless but helpful, and people continue to blame the wrong people for what’s wrong these days.