Comments from Infoshop staff are in italics.
We've moved the hate mail to a new page.
I found your treatise intersting and humorous. How anyone can believe that human beings will just naturally get along without some authority defies belief. You have a much higher opinion of human beings than I do.
I teach school and come in contact with a variety of human types daily. If everyone could, in fact, control his human urges and voluntarily follow good behavior guidelines, I would be the first to sign up for your philosophy. Unfortunately, I live in the real world, not some unreal utopia.
I do, however, alert my students to your ideas. Most agree that, for the good of society, human beings do need rules and regulations that come from government, not self-government.
May 2, 2003
Subject: Application for Dr. Laura fan of the week
Although I'm not really a Dr. Laura fan, I find it interesting and ironic that these "gay right groups" disapprove of our "hypocritical society's" attempt to shut them up, while at the same time suppressing the free speech rights of others (a.k.a. Dr. Laura) who oppose them.
April 30, 2003
I'm doing a research paper for government in school. I'm looking at different types of government (or lack of government) and how they work or don't work. I'm curious how anarchy is supposed to work on a nationwide scale. Please take these questions as they are meant, I'm not trying to accuse or invent arguments as to why anarchy won't work, I really do want to understand how it could work. Decisions have to be made to keep a country alive and working, who makes those decisions? Since it would affect the whole country it wouldn't be true to anarchy to have any one person or group of people make those decisions but how do you get a unanimous decision from the multitudes of peope that it would affect? What about the poeple who will inevitably take advantage of the system and try to get the better of others in some form or another? Who has the authority to say they are wrong and to decide what to do about it? Anarchists talk about a revolt against capitalism, but a succussful revolution implies organization on a grand scale. How could an organization succeed without some sort of leadership, some sort of direction. How could the revolt even get started without someone to take the initiative and say this is what needs to be done? Thank you for taking the time to read this. Any information you could send me to answer my questions or in any other way clarify how anarchy could be successful would be much appreciated.