Previous

Contents

Next

Call Me an Abolitionist, Please*
by Dennis Lee Wilson
DennisLeeWilson -+at+- Yahoo.com

Attribute to The Libertarian Enterprise

I make my views about "anarchy" and "anarchist" explicit in my TLE letter More on "A Personal Journey..."

• I do not see myself or define myself in terms of negatives, such as things that I am against. Rather, I define myself by positives, by what I am for, what I advocate. I place very little importance on being known as an anarchist or an atheist. Both "an-archist" and "a-theist" are—by definition— negative positions in their respective fields and I prefer to emphasize positives. Being against Statism does not automatically make a person in favor of freedom nor provide the knowledge needed to be free, nor the structure of a free society.

• I am not so much an atheist as I am an advocate of reason, and I am not so much an anarchist as I am an advocate of the Covenant of Unanimous Consent. As it happens, being an advocate of reason and of the Covenant also fits within the definitions of atheist and anarchist, but not all atheists are rational or even pretend to be, and not all anarchists are Signatories to the Covenant of Unanimous Consent or even want to be.

However, I have recently had my mind changed by Glen Allport regarding using and defending the term "anarchist". In an article at Strike the Root, dated 2006-Dec-18, (which was finally called to my attention 2 years later) he presents an EXCELLENT CASE for choosing another term to describe my general political position (which, of course, is broader than my specific political position which is Signatory: Covenant of Unanimous Consent).

Perhaps he can change your mind also. His article is at http://www.strike-the-root.com/62/allport/allport4.html

Henceforth, Call Me an Abolitionist, Please

*All due respects to Glen Allport and his article with the same title.

Help Support TLE by patronizing our advertisers and affiliates.
We cheerfully accept donations!