My Deconversion: From Statist to Anarchist

Introduction

I have blog posts dedicated to why I became an atheist and an anarchist, but I've never explained in much detail the thought process that lead me to anarchism. I've chosen to do that now.

Nothing But Doubt

In early 2005 I had just gotten out of major surgery and a friend stopped by to see how I was doing. He handed me a copy of Every Man and Woman an Island: The Individual Human Being as Prime in the Universe, by Robert Clapp. During that time there were too many distractions to read a book so I set it aside until it was time for me to go home.

Once I got home, each night before bed time, I read bits and pieces of the book over a few week period. At this time I hadn't yet met Bob. I wouldn't meet him for close to a year later. As I read his book I was horrified by the numerous stories of police brutality and other examples of government stupidity. Religion is discussed a little in the beginning of the book but is quickly dispatched with. I recall chuckling as he insulted the Pope.

Bob discussed his philosophy beginning by explaining his first principle, Prime, and continuing to other subjects, such as economics and politics, and how each related back to his first principle. He discussed a variety of subjects ranging from history, philosophy, and science, and explained how there are no gods and no need for any ultimate authority, whether god or man.

During this time half of that went over my head. I was already beginning to doubt religion during this time, however, I didn't realize that there was another form of indoctrination I hadn't yet shaken off. All of Bob's explanations about what would replace government completely went over my head. It didn't connect whatsoever. I agreed with his condemnation of police brutality and his complaints about government bungling things. However, his discussions about the institutions and economic processes that would replace the bloated government did not get processed in my brain. For some reason it didn't register that these institutions could replace government. In my mind at the time government had to be there to make sure violence didn't break out, that everyone had clean water, roads, and all the other functions government is currently responsible for. Because of this belief my eyes (and brain) completely glossed over his evidence.

A little over a year later I wanted to begin lifting weights so I could better my physical self in order to become a better martial artist. One of my instructors recommend their personal trainer, Bob Clapp, who I'd heard about over the years. He was a long time friend and trainer to another friend and martial arts instructor of mine. All I knew about Bob was that he was in his 70's, was still in excellent shape, that he was a very good trainer, and he really did not like government or religion. Even though I had read and enjoyed his book prior to my discussions with Bob I did not understand his first principle and doubted the validity of anarchism. Over the span of the next year much of what was said in the book I allowed to drift from my memory.

I made an appointment to begin weight training with Bob and for a few months we didn't talk about much, he just took me through my workouts. Then one day I thought I'd tell him that I had read his book and really enjoyed it and how I agreed with a lot of it. He was very appreciative of my praise. It was at this moment when Bob and I began to discuss a variety of things: religion, philosophy in general, government, science, the science of weight lifting, and especially his philosophy. Over the years sometimes we would talk so much during my hour long session I'd miss half of my workout because we would begin discussing whatever subject that came up at that moment. This was also the time that I can say that we started to become friends and he became a mentor to me.


I like to think that he not only gave me the tools to improve my body but also my mind. He recommended numerous books for me to read. For history he recommended Will Durant's enormous series called The Story of Civilization. He recommended other books on politics and several anarchist thinkers who I also read, such as Emma Goldman and Lysander Spooner. Their words resonated in me greatly. I agreed very much with their pronouncements of freedom and equality and their criticisms of government. However, I still believed that we needed government for so many things! What would happen without government!? It was unthinkable!

The Flood Gates Open

Prior to this I had never read very widely. I had hundreds of books on martial arts, eastern philosophy, a little psychology, and Buddhism, but history or science? I didn't know jack about hardly any of it. I was familiar with the basics of evolution from my research into the creationism and evolution debacle, but that was the extent of my scientific knowledge at that point in time. After meeting Bob it opened up my intellectual curiosity and my thirst for knowledge.

I began to research anarchism extensively, along with other subjects, trying to find out how realistic this view actually was. I read more books by anarchist thinkers but mostly all I found were numerous theories but no concrete evidence that anarchism could be a workable alternative. I was still skeptical.

Then over a period of a several months it hit me. I realized something. I came to see how the same arguments Christians use to defend their religion from criticism were the exact same kinds of arguments Statists use to defend government. This was the first time I started to believe that anarchism just might be possible. If these arguments for government failed, just as they do for the existence of god and the truth of religion, then what foundation is there for government? I reasoned that it would be illogical for the same set of arguments to be valid in the case of government, but not religion. At this point my doubts began to shrink.

I kept doing more research and after a few years came to the realization that all of the justifications for government are flawed. Every single one. I discovered valid alternatives to the state that had real-world equivalents and this fact sealed the deal for me. Not only were the concepts and principles of anarchism logical and moral, but I found that they were also practical. I had found the empirical evidence was looking for. It was during this time that I became an anarchist.

You've Got a Bad Case of Intellectual Dishonesty

I enjoy debate. It was through this process that helped confirm both my atheist and my anarchist views. Through debate you can see first hand the arguments used by actual proponents of either view. You can also see something else: their emotional reactions to the facts you present.

Having your belief system torn down by facts is not a fun process to go through. Whether you are a statist or theist it doesn't matter. Likely since childhood these individuals have been brought up in these belief systems to obey these higher authorities; that they are necessary for the existence of mankind. Atheists are lucky. They've shaken off half of the indoctrination but still fight tooth and nail to deny the other form of worship and authoritarianism: Statism. [1]

Just as many theists get defensive and lash out at you, so do statists when their views are threatened. I've experienced this from both camps and from my vantage point of looking outside in at both of these beliefs I see the similarities. I see the emotional reactions that occur when statists and theists are confronted with the facts that atheists and anarchists present. Like me, when I first read Bob's book his arguments didn't even register inside my brain. I imagine that is the same for most statists as well, since most times my arguments seem to be ignored as my opponents proceed to repeat their original arguments that I had already disproved earlier in a discussion. This is why it seems as if they are purposefully ignoring my arguments, but perhaps they're not. Perhaps the facts I present are just not registering, just as they didn't for me in the beginning. Rather than outright intellectual dishonesty it could be a pure case of cognitive dissonance.

Continuing Education

Vary rarely do I watch the mainstream media any more. I only watch it for local news and to see what propaganda the government (and their pet news organizations) are spilling out into millions of homes. I've found that independent media does a much better job of covering the lies, abuses, and distortions of facts the government is responsible for, if they cover these stories at all. Often times they are given very little, if any, coverage.

Now I mostly read history by historians who aren't afraid to tell history like it really was, like Kenneth C. Davis, or especially Howard Zinn. For my politics I enjoy many of Noam Chomsky's insights and I watch Democracy Now! daily.

The scales have been wiped completely from my eyes. I view history and the present with a sense of astonishment but also fear for the future. I see how much things have changed, but at the same time (sadly) how much has stayed the same. How far will the government continue to go in violating our rights? How much more will they invade our privacy? Will the majority ever come to the same or similar conclusions I came to, and when might that be? What would it take to convince a 'dyed-in-the-wool statist-head,' to slightly tweak one of Richard Dawkins' most famous phrases, that anarchism is a practical alternative? Likely, it's similar to religious indoctrination where non-believers make little head way in convincing believers no matter how much evidence you throw at them.

As I type there are numerous protests taking place and I am happy the majority are finally waking up, at least to a degree, but where it will lead I don't know. All I do know is that if the people do not scrape the scales from their eyes as I did they will be right back where they are right now at some point in the future, just as all of the past revolutions and protests throughout the history of this country have led to very little real change over the years. The rich and powerful still control the vast majority of land and wealth, they still neglect the poor and in many cases minorities, and peoples' rights continue to be trampled underfoot. I fear the solution to all of this – anarchism – is something people will unfortunately overlook.

Conclusion

At this point in my intellectual journey I do firmly believe that anarchism is clearly a possible and worthwhile goal. However, will this state of things ever be realized, either through a government collapse or an over-taking by the people? This I cannot answer with certainty but I do believe with most individuals' indoctrination fully in place anarchy will not be achieved through human action, but more likely from government failure. On the other hand who knows what the future will bring...



1. I use the term “worship” because of the way in which statists swoon over government; are reliant upon it, and believe (falsely) that nothing can be done without it. This is much like many religionists' god, who they believe will comfort them in times of worry and fear, and will do what needs to be done. Research has even proven this to be true. In both cases, both groups have essentially surrendered their ability to self-rely on themselves and their fellow human beings in favor of some pipe dream that will never materialize.