Imagine I were to imprison millions of people, with vastly different, tastes, values, ideologies, moral/ethical beliefs, faiths, etc, and offer you power of attorney to elect another totally unpredictable, virtually unknown to you, power of attorney over them, to make decisions for them, against their will, would you accept this power?

Apparently the answer to this question amongst "libertarian voters" so-called, is yes, they would, especially if they are in this prison as well. In this short essay, I intend to show that by doing so, these "libertarian voters" so-called, themselves become politicians, and members of the involuntarily inclusive and coercive State, and surrender any logical right to object to the States jurisdiction they are forced to live under, because they are essentially objecting to themselves.

Let's review,

So the story goes:

The coercive, involuntarily inclusive State / political class / political office holders (henceforth simply, "the State"), begins to initiate aggression against individuals throughout the world, with the moral sanction of only some of these individuals. The State then offers most adults in it's claimed mala prohibita enforcing legal jurisdiction, the chance to anonymously vote, from a list approved by the State, which individuals will be allowed into it's ranks, and therefore into authority over all in the States claimed jurisdiction, these individuals motives, and future actions are completely unpredictable, uncontrollable by those that anonymously select them, and therefore entirely indiscernible from one another, prior to their taking office (these people that are to be selected I will call "candidates"). This selecting goes on against the wishes of many, if not most in the States claimed jurisdiction.

Most States do not force anybody to make this anonymous selection, and there exist means of resisting the State, outside of this State granted power to select candidates for everybody else. Nobody knows what would happen if nobody, or very few, accepted, and used this power to anonymously choose a candidate for everybody else, and nobody knows that it would be impossible for those that oppose the State, to throw off it's claimed authority from them, without using this power to anonymously select candidates for everybody else, therefore nobody knows if this scenario is a lifeboat scenario or not, in fact there are many examples in history of people doing just that, without accepting their respective States power to anonymously select candidates for others against their wishes.

So called "libertarian voters" (henceforth simply "proxyists") concede that it was immoral for the State to take this power, but claim that it is morally just for them to accept it from the State, to select candidates for others against their wishes. Proxyists claim that the power they are using was not first taken by them, and that they are only accepting, and using it after it was taken by force, by the State. Proxyists proudly, and confidently predict, that in the future, the candidates they know little to nothing about, but will anonymously choose for everybody else against their wishes, will reduce, or abolish the use of the illegitimate power they will posses when they become members of the State. Proxyists also claim that by accepting the States offer, and anonymously choosing candidates for everybody else against their wishes, they are not consenting to the system whereby other voters, not claiming to be libertarians (commonly referred to as "Statists," even by these so-called "libertarian voters"), use the same exact power, in the same exact fashion to anonymously vote candidates over them, and others.

As a libertarian anarchist, panarchist, and conscientious non-voter, I believe it is only moral to accept the power to choose candidates, for membership in a State, when everyone in the respective State's claimed mala prohibita enforcing legal jurisdiction, has consented to it's jurisdiction, power, and authority. I believe that it is peoples willingness to collude with the involuntarily inclusive State, accept illegitimate power from it, and take liberty in manipulating others freedoms, is the PRIMARY barrier to the realization of a libertarian society, and the respect for individual rights necessary for maintaining it. Until a governing body / legal jurisdiction exists, that I am a consenting member of, wherein all power to enforce mala prohibita is derived from the consent of the governed, I will only support direct action, and civil disobedience, as forms of resistance to current coercive States. These are the only means of resistance I am aware of consistent with the non-aggression axiom, the foundation of libertarian theory.