• Home
• Guide
• Resources
• Feedback
• About

Beginner's Guide to Peace - Fellow Travelers

“We are all travelers in the wilderness of this world, and the best we can find in our travels is an honest friend” - Robert Louis Stevenson

“To know the road ahead, ask those who are coming back.” - Chinese proverb

The Fellowship of the NAP

In J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings trilogy, the Fellowship of the Ring is gathered for the expressed purpose of destroying the ring of power. The One Ring, you see, was created by the evil one in order to rule all. Anyone attempting to wield the ring’s power, even in the hope of doing good, risked corruption. It was agreed that no one should ever possess the ring as its intoxicating force inevitably led its bearer into darkness, leaving behind a trail of death and destruction.

The Fellowship of the NAP, if we were to assemble one, would have a more constructive purpose, that of promoting freedom and peace for all. The NAP is the antithesis of the centralized power of the One Ring. Instead of rule by one, it suggests freedom and self-rule for all. Instead of pushing individuals towards war, destruction and poverty, the NAP draws one to the possibility of a peaceful, harmonious and prosperous world.

Constructive Anarchy

While working on the Lord of the Rings, Tolkien wrote to his son that “my political opinions lean more and more to Anarchy (philosophically understood, meaning abolition of control not whiskered men with bombs)” adding “The most improper job of any man, even saints, is bossing other men. Not one in a million is fit for it, and least of all those who seek the opportunity."[1] In Tolkien’s trilogy, we find the Fellowship operating as an anarchic band without an official leader. Each individual, guided by a noble purpose, contributes as the situation warrants and is free to adapt to changing conditions.

Out of Their Minds

For many people anarchy is a scary word. For some the word conjures images of mad bombers and chaos but the word “anarchy” simply means the absence of rulers. It does not necessarily mean the absence of rules. Language, for example, is anarchic in that there is a structure with rules but there is no centralized authority enforcing proper usage nor is there an agency for creating new words[2]. When the publishers of the Oxford Dictionary add new words to their volume, they are only recognizing current usage and documenting its evolution. Shakespeare invented and combined hundreds of words, many in common use today, not because he had any authority to enforce their usage but because the words and combinations he coined enhanced the ability of people to communicate. In this matter Shakespeare was a creative anarchist, fully embracing liberty in his artistic endeavors.

Dating and courtship rituals are other examples of human interactions that vary widely among cultures but are typically anarchic in nature, and increasingly so. As with language, outside of societies ruled by a theocratic state there is no centralized power to enforce the often subtle rules of courtship. What nearly all modern cultures have in common is an increasingly skeptical attitude towards any external interference in affairs of the heart.

Indeed, interactions between the sexes have evolved to become freer and more anarchic as societies have developed. Where once marriages were arranged and courtships required the oversight of a chaperone, if the young unmarried couple was even allowed to meet at all, in many cultures couples are now free to negotiate their own rules of behavior in their relationships with each other.

The Varieties of Anarchic Experience

In today’s modern world most philosophical anarchists generally support the Non-Aggression Principle, correctly recognizing that the institution of government is a habitual aggressor against liberty, property and, at times, life itself. Unfortunately some anarchists are inconsistent in their support of the NAP, opposing certain kinds of property and perhaps not realizing the aggressions required to implement such restrictions. These anarchists are often referred to as left anarchists, anarcho-syndicalists or anarcho-communists. Noam Chomsky, for example, is often associated with this strain of anarchism. While very good at critiquing the dangers of government power and foreign interventions, Chomsky tends to be weak in his understanding of economics and the operation of an unhindered free market.

Most libertarians, anarcho-capitalists, voluntaryists, agorists and anarcho-libertarians, on the other hand, are more consistant in their support of the Non-Aggression Principle, emphasizing the need for private property as a means of protecting liberty. The late Murray N. Rothbard is often referred to as Mr. Libertarian for his massive body of work on the role of both property and liberty in a properly functioning society.

Finally, out on the fringes, there are the completely self-contradictory nutcases who attach to themselves the term “anarchist” while simultaneously inflicting violence against both people and property. During the 1960’s, for example, there were a small number of supposedly antiwar protestors who would bomb buildings and sometimes kill people in the name of “peace”. In more recent times there have been so called “enviro-anarchists” who have used similar tactics. It is important to remember that terrorism is a tactic, not a philosophy, and that the practice of terror usually creates blowback, often in an unintended or unpredictable direction.

Friends of Liberty, United for Peace

"As for politics, I’m an anarchist. I hate governments and rules and fetters. Can’t stand caged animals. People must be free." - Charlie Chaplin

Advocates of the NAP, especially those emphasizing the importance of freedom, often refer to themselves as members of the Liberty Movement. Probably the most common single label for this group is libertarian, sometimes referred to as “little ‘L’ libertarian” to distinguish it from various local and national Libertarian political parties that seek government office in the hopes of minimizing the damage of government rather than calling for its complete elimination. Members of Libertarian political parties are sometimes referred to as minarchists for their support of minimal government in contrast to the anarcho-libertarian call for no government.

Leading the Way

The following is a short list of people currently active in the liberty movement that I would nominate as key members for the Fellowship of the NAP. I embrace them as fellow travelers for their consistent support of both peace and liberty. This is in no way an inclusive list but is a purely personal selection:

Lew Rockwell (The Guide) – Lew is the founder and chairman of the Ludwig von Mises Institute (Mises.org), an organization dedicated to Austrian economics education and the promotion of the free market. He also runs the self-named website which proudly declares itself to be “Anti-State, Anti-War and Pro Market”.

It was through LewRockwell.com that I first came in contact with the writings of Murray Rothbard and a number of other great libertarian writers. Lew was a great friend and colleague of Murray's and has written a number of books himself including The Left, the Right and the State and Against the State: An Ararcho-Capitalist Manifesto.

I have long admired Lew for his consistent anti-war stance. In recent years he has continued to demonstrate his courage in opposing the Covid regime and the destruction of civil society.

Scott Horton (The Truth Seeker) –Scott is passionate about peace and liberty with a strong focus on foreign policy from a libertarian perspective. He has a podcast archive of thousands of interviews at ScottHorton.org and is one of the co-founders and managing director of The Libertarian Institute. Scott has also written several books including Fool's Errand, a study of the war against Afghanistan, and Enough Already: Time to End the War on Terrorism, an overview of the many failed U.S. wars since the Korean War.

I have been listening to Scott's podcasts for more than 15 years. There are times, however, when I need to take a break for a few weeks because I can no longer bear to hear any more of the vast and intentional evil that the American Empire has waged against large numbers of peoples across the planet. Scott is the kind of person I would want working next to me on any kind of dirty, thankless job.

Tom Woods Jr. (The Uniter) – Tom appears to be an all-around great guy. He is an excellent teacher with a background in history and a solid understanding of economics. He is strongly anti-war and hosts a daily podcast at TomWoods.com where he interviews a wide array of guests and covers a number of interesting topics.

This is the kind of guy I would want to be my next door neighbor, and one of the few that I would trust with the destruction of the Ring of Power, metaphorically speaking.

Dr. Ron Paul (The Healer) – A former obstetrician, Ron Paul has been handing out the prescription for peace for decades.

A lot of people have jokingly referred to Dr. Paul as the gateway drug to libertarianism. Unfortunately a lot of people, especially his former colleagues in Congress, have preferred the drug of power and the rush of war. He has a daily video podcast called The Ron Paul Liberty Report as well as a site for his Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

Dave Smith (The Jokester) – Truth telling through comedy (Part of the Problem). Strongly anti-war and definitely not politically correct, Dave pulls no punches as he attacks the hypocrisy of both the left and the right. SNL could definitely use a comic like this. Please note that some of his material may not be safe for work.

Stefan Molyneaux (The Wizard) – Stefan is a loquacious know-it-all who became a somewhat controversial figure within the liberty movement for his position on immigration and tactical support of Trump. He has a background in philosophy and entrepreneurship with a solid understanding of economics. He has covered a wide range of topics in his podcasts, among the most important being his consistent and vocal support of peaceful parenting. He posts a regular podcast at FreeDomain.com.

I especially liked his "The Truth About.." episodes that used to be available on YouTube. Unfortunately his work has been banned from that platform because of his repeated philosophical and fact based challenges to orthodoxy. While I don't agree with everything he says, I would have enjoyed having him as a professor, mostly because of his willingness to examine the facts and follow the logic and evidence, wherever that ultimately leads.

In addition to those above, there are a great many other hard working libertarians making significant contributions to the cause of peace and liberty. Some of these include Jeffrey Tucker, James Bovard, Michael Malice, Thomas DiLorenzo, Buck Johnson, Marc Clair, Walter Block, Robert Higgs, Stephan Kinsella, Michael Rozeff and Pete Quinones. Additional information can be found on the Resource page.

A Society of Friends

As with any group of fellow travelers, there will always be some disagreement among friends and companions with regard to goals, ideals and understanding of the world. While I have gained much from my study of the world's great religions, I have a special place in my heart for the Religious Society of Friends, more popularly known as the Quakers. I highly respect this group’s long history of opposition to war and slavery. In the 1600 and 1700’s the Quakers had a great reputation for peaceful cooperation with the Native American tribes within the Pennsylvania colony and surrounding areas.

As Murray Rothbard describes in Conceived in Liberty:

“Pursuing a policy of peace, incomprehensible to most of the other colonists, who were generally conscienceless in slaughtering the Indians, the Quakers of Pennsylvania built no forts, established no militia, and hired no scouts and Indian fighters. And by pursuing a policy of peace and no armaments, they found, mirabile dictu, that they had nothing to fear. They had earned and gained the lasting respect of the Indians, and fair play met with fair play in its turn. As in New Jersey, where Quakers were influential in shaping Indian policy, there was no Indian war in the history of the colony so long as the Quakers ruled.”[3]

Considering all believers to be members of the priesthood, some branches of Quakerism are very anarchic in their organization. Additionally, while some offshoots seem to have a questionable understanding of the operation of the free market, the BBC none-the-less once described them as “natural capitalists”[4]. Members of this group have also pushed hard for prison reform and other social causes over the years. Guided by an Inner Light, this group has demonstrated a deep commitment to non-aggression over the centuries.

Paying Respects

In keeping with the intimate nature of this section, it would be ill-mannered not to mention one other personal influence that guided me to the Liberty Movement and the Non-Aggression Principle.

Ron Smith was a talk radio host in Baltimore from 1984 until his passing in late 2011. I began listening to his show in 1985, shortly after moving within range of his station’s signal. Perhaps more that any single person, he influenced my intellectual growth over the quarter of a century that I listened to him. Probably best described as a member of the “Old Right”[5] with a strong libertarian leaning, Ron was a former Marine who was also a harsh critic of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He reported that he lost "30 to 40 percent"[6] of his audience for a time because of his position. Unlike Phil Donahue[7], a popular left leaning television show host on MSNBC who was fired for his criticism of the Iraq war, Ron managed to hold onto his job and his audience benefited greatly from his presentation of dissenting opinions throughout the early years of the war.

Through his discussions and interviews, I was exposed to the unintended consequences of government policies in books such as Blowback by Chalmers Johnson and Preferential Policies by Thomas Sowell. I was also introduced to Lew Rockwell's great website as well as the revisionist history writings of Ron's friend Thomas DiLorenzo and that author’s support of the free market through historical examples.

Though Ron Smith may never have made the leap to fully support libertarianism in his lifetime, it is through his presentation of divergent ideas that I myself was able to reach that conclusion. For that I am forever grateful.

The Journey Ahead

Kudos on coming so far. Be prepared, however, as some of the remaining sections may be tricky. On the next part of our journey we will navigate Treacherous Roads, confront Mirages and Delusions, and discover the risks of Losing the Way. We will then take note of Dead Ends where others have faltered and wrap up by considering the risks and rewards of Going Off Road. For those with a stout heart and an inquisitive mind, we bid thee fare well!

------------------------------------------

Essentials

-Anarchy is the absence of rulers. It does not necessarily mean there are no rules nor is it a synonym for chaos.

-Power is a corrupting force as has been demonstrated throughout history. It is also a common theme in literature.

-Although we each have our own journey to travel through life, our paths often intersect and parallel those others have traveled. Experienced fellow travelers can serve as helpful guides on the path of peace, liberty and prosperity.

Further Explorations

Chalmers Johnson describes the unintended consequences of U.S. government interference in other countries in Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire (American Empire Project).

Thomas Sowell describes the destructive outcomes of government preferential policies across the globe in Preferential Policies: An International Perspective.

Thomas DiLorenzo provides multiple historical examples of how the free market has worked much better than government in How Capitalism Saved America: The Untold History of Our Country, from the Pilgrims to the Present.

__________________________________

Unless stated otherwise, all material copyright 2015-2023 (C) by Andrew Lesko - All Rights Reserved