Is Voluntaryism Biased?
There is no bias in voluntaryism (antistatist positions dependent upon the non-aggression principle or NAP). This is not to say voluntaryists are without flaw, far from it, the measure of bias is in the intended goal however flawed the supposed method. High-minded adherents may balk at the above distinction and legitimately decry it as exceptionalist. Admittedly true, exceptionalism is only intellectually transgressive insofar as it is unsubstantiated. Voluntaryism is utterly and categorically exceptional. This is stated unapologetically and with appreciation for the gravity of the claim. While it may seem rash or fervently partisan on its face, seeming varies where truth remains.
The impetus for writing this article is the tendency of many voluntaryists to pander to expectations and norms of political discourse. It is demeaning to a peaceful individual of a principled position to be reduced in essence and made to feel their position is simply one biased opinion among various forceful and violent ideologies. All these violent and forceful political ideologies are subservient to the stated or unstated goals and aspirations of adherents, their philosophies merely legitimization for the use of the force requisite to achieve them. Put simply, all political ideologies have an intended benefactor group, individuals with whom the adherent will identify with and/or idolize. The socialist statist advocate of welfarism will see the poor or subjugated peoples as the group deserving of special treatment. For nationalists, this group will consist of natural born citizens of their country, typically of their own race. With capitalist statists, this group will be the most wealthy, they see this class as the “driving force” of the country and the ones most deserving of special treatment. Typical real world views of the average person will involve some combination of the above given different weights dependent upon the individual’s tendencies.
Voluntaryism is the negation of these political ideologies. As these ideologies would seek to, without regard to the composite individuals, take action upon some groups to the benefit of others, they could be said naturally to have a bias toward the latter. There is a faith in an assertion of realities without care for evidence, in this way they resemble most religions. A blind zealotry disparate of facts guiding a bizarre assuredness toward bloodied acquisitions with uncaring resolve. To categorize as such a calm view of the world, which seeks only to do away with such aggressions, is the perfect example of dishonesty.
The modern voluntaryist movement is nothing more than the natural progression of abolitionists of past generations. At the time of widespread acceptance of slavery, abolitionists were seen as ridiculous idealists and believers of an unachievable dream. Their views were not seen for what they were, for the most part, principled applications of logic without bias. The same is true of modern abolitionists of the state.
Do not apologize for being free of bias, do not pretend to the standards of their discourse. You owe nothing, least of all an explanation, for being right.