This letter was originally published in The Atlantis News Volume II, No. 5, March 7, 1969, pp. 1-2. An earlier issue of The Atlantis News included a critique of a speech that Murray Rothbard gave in New York on January 31, 1969. The critique argued that Rothbard was wrong to condone revolution because revolution is immoral. I responded with this letter to the editor, using the pseudonym Roy G. Biv. Sometime later I was visiting the Rothbards at their apartment in Manhattan and Murray, who subscribed to The Atlantis News and knew that I was living at the Altantis Motel, said that he was glad to see that the Atlantis operation had attracted an intelligent commentator, and he asked me if I kew who this Roy G. Biv was. When I told him I was Roy G. Biv, he grinned and patted me on the shoulder.

For Rothbard and Revolution

Your objections to revolution, particularly those you listed as ethical objections, show you to be less of a libertarian than were the founders of the government from which you seek to escape. If you were a total pacifist your disapproval would make sense, but I don’t believe you are.

Your article only shows how firmly entrenched the myth of the state has become in this country. Do you believe that Jefferson and Paine were immoral for being revolutionaries and for cooperating with people who had "wrong" philosophies? Do you seriously object to depriving people of the right to be fleeced, exploited, monopolized, inspected, directed, regulated, numbered, rated, stamped, authorized, prevented, indoctrinated, spied on, seized, censured, fined, imprisoned, shot, enslaved, outraged, and dishonored? Does the fact that many people are content to live this way make government inviolable? Must we in the name of justice be forced to desert our homeland simply because the majority is docile and we are not?

The "Ethic" which says it is immoral to destroy a criminal organization simply because that organization may not act criminally toward everyone is impotent and nonsensical. Taken in its extreme form it means that no man may defend himself against the criminal acts of any other man because to do so might make it impossible for the criminal to continue whatever legitimate business he may have with other people. Only a total pacifist can hold this position.

I agree with Frederick Douglas when he said,

Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation, are men who want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the roar of its many waters.

Back to Pieces from My Radical Libertarian Period

Back to Libertarian Essays by Roy Halliday

This page was last updated on August 6, 2000.
This site is maintained by Roy Halliday. If you have any comments or suggestions, please send them to royhalliday@mindspring.com.