Vision

We hold that the existence of the state is the consequence of a prehistoric tragedy, a calamity whose most recent occurrence unfolded between six and eleven millennia ago. In brief, we posit that for the majority of human history, there were no large-scale governments. Humanity existed in smaller, self-organized groups, free of overarching rulers. But at some point, a pivotal event drew people together into agricultural settlements.

With the rise of these close-knit communities came the inevitable challenges of cohabitation. To address these, small-scale systems of authority likely emerged, their purpose ostensibly to mediate disputes and maintain order in the local sphere. This might have been a pragmatic adaptation to the growing complexity of human interaction, fitting for the modest scale of early settlements. Yet, it did not take long for ambition to take root. The desire to dominate broader territories, to claim ownership over others’ communities, birthed the seeds of large-scale governance.

We cannot claim to know with certainty what life was like before the state. But neither can anyone assert that the state’s rise marked an unequivocal improvement for humanity. The historical record, as it begins to emerge, tells a grim tale: authorities, seeking to command vast territories, relied on coercion and violence to secure their rule. This force was not a tool of reluctant necessity but a fundamental instrument of their power, employed despite the lack of genuine consent of those they sought to govern.

Over the lifespan of this platform, we aspire to uncover and present evidence of the inherent violence and malevolence of government. We aim to demonstrate that its existence is not a natural or benevolent feature of human society but a usurpation born of coercion. To those who would demand of us, “What alternative do you propose?” we answer: the question itself reveals the shackles of imagination forged by centuries of state dominance. The absence of violence, the restoration of voluntary association, and the rejection of coercion—these are not alternatives; they are the ideals of a free humanity. To suggest an “alternative” to the state means to suggest a replacement, and we have no interest in replacing the state. We want it gone for good, and we want a culture that eschews its lures.

These are our pillars:

  1. Voluntaryism: A term of recent coinage among those who champion individual liberty, and it deserves precise articulation, as we shall provide below. We assert that the very existence of the state is both immoral and without justification. Far from safeguarding freedom, the state has curtailed it in every corner of society. At its core, the state is nothing more than a cadre of individuals, among whom an alarming number exploit their roles for personal gain and domination over others. Consider this undeniable proof: to enforce laws devoid of violence, such as those mandating taxation or compulsory education, the state resorts to threats of incarceration, expropriation of property, or outright violence. These coercive measures lay bare the fundamental hypocrisy of a structure that claims to act on behalf of freedom. We maintain that those who occupy the thrones of state power labor to preserve an illusion: that the governed are free, possessed of rights and liberties, while being bound in chains of obligation to obey, submit, and serve. Their governance is a sleight of hand, ensuring that any semblance of autonomy is an empty facade.

    While some states create the illusion of popular choice by allowing rulers to be selected through the votes of a majority, this does not justify state dominion. Even if a multitude agrees to impose their will, it remains tyranny. The multiplication of oppressors does not sanctify the oppression.
    We further hold that any state that denies its people the freedom to opt out of its systems – to live untaxed, unlevied, unpoliced, and unmolested by its decrees – is inherently criminal. Such a state strips its subjects of their most basic right: to consent to governance or to abstain from it entirely. It imposes its will upon all, regardless of their convictions, preferences, or dissent.

    Therefore, we declare: if a state is to exist, it must be wholly voluntary in its dealings with its citizens. It must permit each individual to freely choose whether to participate—whether to pay taxes, join retirement programs, render military or community service, or submit to the jurisdiction of police. No one may be compelled, under penalty of imprisonment, dispossession, or any forfeiture of rights, to partake in its systems.

    Moreover, no refusal to participate should ever result in punishment, confinement, economic harm, or the restriction of personal freedoms. Any condition that seeks to enforce obedience at the cost of liberty contravenes the essence of voluntaryism.

    Such is the true nature of voluntaryism: a society where every individual is free to engage with or withdraw from the state, without coercion, threat, or harm. Only under these principles can the ideal of liberty be fulfilled.

  2. Anarchy (Gk. ἀναρχία, “lacking ruler”) Anarchy signifies nothing more than the absence of a ruling class. It does not entail the absence of rules or principles, nor does it imply a rejection of justice or righteous conduct. Anarchy is not chaos; it is the deliberate absence of imposed hierarchy.\

    We contend that while our understanding of the liberties, customs, and governance of prehistoric humanity is necessarily limited, any defense of the state’s merits must grapple with a stark and unavoidable truth: the state has made global-scale violence not only conceivable but perilously attainable. The tools of war and annihilation that now exist – made possible by the machinery and ambition of states – threaten to unmake civilization itself. Let us not forget: the cruelty and violence inherent in humanity are not new. Such tendencies, left to individuals or small groups, manifest as isolated brutality, contained by the natural constraints of their scale. But through the state, we have amplified these instincts to monstrous proportions, forging weapons that place the fate of the world in the hands of the few. This is the legacy of governance—the elevation of human savagery to the level of existential peril.
    Anarchists, however, propose a different path. We advocate a society untethered from the apparatus of state coercion and hierarchy, not through upheaval drenched in blood, but by way of peace. Anarchy seeks not to destroy, but to liberate; to replace imposed authority with voluntary cooperation and mutual respect.

At Truth Against Power, we cannot recall ever affixing our names to a so-called “social contract.” We never consented to the retirement plan that delivered us our identification number, nor did we willingly assent to a system that binds us without choice. We grew incensed upon discovering that our patriotic education, carefully curated and systematically delivered, omitted essential truths about the nature of those who govern. For an institution that claims to value liberty, its silence on such matters is deafening.

Education, a beacon we hold in the highest regard, has instead been weaponized to render the masses pliant and easily swayed. What should have been a tool for enlightenment and empowerment has too often become a mechanism of control, conditioning people to accept authority without question and to mistake obedience for virtue.

We assert with unwavering confidence that, if afforded the opportunity, individuals would make the right choice—the choice of voluntary participation in governance. Given freedom from coercion, they would forge relationships of mutual consent, not subservience, and would embrace systems built on fairness, autonomy, and genuine collaboration.

Such a society, rooted in voluntary association, stands in stark contrast to the imposed structures we know today—structures that claim legitimacy through the hollow pretense of an agreement we never made.