Samuel Edward Konkin III - An Agorist Primer

Preface

Ideas evolve and grow. At some point, an idea connects with so many other concepts that it becomes central to a way of thinking - an ideology.

At some state of an ideology's life, between its birth and death, it reaches a level of maturity such that someone is motivated to divert his efforts from expanding it outward and upward and begins to look downward. That is, the theoretician pauses to pass on the knowledge to those not specializing in theoretical development. Perhaps the theoretician is reminded for whom he developed the ideology in the first place.

Agorism is a way of thinking about the world around you, a method of understanding why things work the way they do, how they do, and how they can be dealt with - how you can deal with them.

Agorism was meant to improve the lot of everyone, not a chosen elite or unwashed underclass. Hence an introductory work that presents ideas without going through the long intellectual history and conflict of competing ideas that produced them. As the creator of agorism, it is most incumbent on me first to attempt to reduce it to basic intelligibility. I hope my efforts find some small reward.

- Samuel Edward Konkin III

Introduction

Agorism can be defined simply: it is thought and action consistent with freedom. The moment one deals with "thinking," "acting," "consistency," and especially "freedom," things get more and more complex.

Hold on to the virtue of consistency. The refusal to compromise, to deceive oneself, to "sell out" or to "be realistic" created agorism. Consider "being realistic." This usually implies that theory is fine for thinking, but in practice one must deal with reality. Agorists believe that any theory which does not describe reality is either useless or a deliberate attempt by intellectuals to defraud non-specialists.

When someone urges you to be realistic, may you pick an agorist book to get the best description you can find of how agorism actually works. If you want to find books and articles that will "fake reality" for wishes, whims, fears, and spite, look for labels such as "Liberal," "Conservative," "Socialist," "Communist," "Fascist," or - worst of all - "middle of the road" and "moderate."

Reality knows no moderation; it is - all the way.

One way of thinking came close to agorism and is fairly well-known today; we will deal with Libertarianism later in some detail. An ideology of Liberty, it had to choose at one point between consistency with reality and being the "politics of liberty." It chose the latter: the contradiction of seeking political power over others to eliminate political power over others.

Those who continued to seek liberty consistently and without the practical contradiction of Libertarians became agorists. This is a second, historical definition for you.

Agorism is an ideology, then, but it is also a scientific and definitely materialist way of thinking. It is not a religious view - save that it believes absolute freedom to be moral - nor does it wish to displace anyone's religious views - unless they lead to slavery. Agorism wants no "true believers" in the sense of blind followers. Like any scientifically based mode of thought, it will evolve as does our understanding of reality. One who has faith in something proven false that was once a tenet of agorism is not an agorist.

Reality is our standard. Nature is our lawgiver.

In a general sense, agorism is scientific in that it bases itself on verifiable observations about reality. But it is scientific in a specific sense as well. It may be hard for chemists, physicists, and engineers to believe that a "hard science" was ever developed in fields such as economics and political science; but the discovery of this science by me - a hard-bitten theoretical chemist, cynical of "soft" science - led eventually through libertarianism to agorism.

The study of human action (praxeology) produced some repeatable observations deserving the title of scientific law. The area of human action dealing with exchanges between acting humans (catallactics) covers the same area of thought that economics is supposed to cover, but often with very different conclusions.

This kind of economics (sometimes called Austrian economics) was used by speculators such as Harry Browne and Doug Casey for investing in hard-money instruments, beating taxes, and surviving when society around them is operating on unreason and folly. It is that potent, a tool for survival amidst gloom and doom.

However, it can be more. By applying this economic understanding to all human action regardless of the wishes, whims, fears, and spite of the most powerful agency in society - the State (coercive government) - a new field of theory dealing only with practical action emerges: Counter-Economics.

Finally, when libertarian theory meets Counter-Economics, what comes out - in strict consistency, both external and internal - is Agorism. This is still another definition.

And this is the definition with which I feel most comfortable, the one that the thieves of the intellect find hardest to pervert or steal: Agorism is the consistent integration of libertarian theory with counter-economic practice; an agorist is one who acts consistently for freedom and in freedom.

A basic understanding of agorism falls naturally into four phases of integration or four steps of learning. In addition to grasping the premises involved, one should be able to apply them. Remember always that agorism integrates theory and practice. Theory without practice is game-playing; taken seriously, it leads to withdrawal from reality, mysticism, and insanity. Practice without theory is robotic; taken seriously, it leads to tilling barren soil and showing up for work at closed factories. Perhaps it would help to think of theory as wedded to practice where divorce leads to ruin. Or the relationship could be viewed as that between brain and stomach or mind and body: neither can survive without the other.

So four concepts and four applications lead naturally to eight chapters.

The author and publisher welcome your questions because they will indicate where we can clarify and improve subsequent editions.

Chapter One: Economics

Economics is a dismal science. Those understanding certain economic concepts profit flamboyantly. Economics is a tool corporations and governments use to control society. Those understanding economic concepts have toppled governments that refuse to face the very same concepts. Economics is a meaningless college exercise. Speculators understanding economics make millions of dollars and save others from financial ruin. Here is our problem: all the above statements are true.

If that makes you think there's an inconsistency in the use of Economics, you are correct. With a lower-case "e", economics is the study of relations between people involving goods and services. With a capital "E", Economics is an institution financed mostly by government and its tax-privileged foundations. With foundation money, this institution controls - however imperfectly - those who would learn and teach economics at government schools or private colleges.

Maybe this appears to be a big deal made out of little; after all, is not most of chemistry and astronomy and mathematics also institutionalized? Imagine the case where only "pro-government chemistry," "conservative astronomy," or "socialist biology" was taught and those who tried to teach straight science were vilified as crackpots. Fantastic? Lysenko's pseudo-biology was taught in the Soviet Union because it was more in line with Marxist theory than was straight genetics. Currently, Man-Made Global Warming is approaching the status of state-approved climatology, with dissenters shouted down, defunded, smeared as apologists for polluters, and even threatened with the recision of their academic degrees.