is established? I can conceive of no other individualistic measure (11) by which the cost principle of value can be realized in those cases in which the cost of producing equal quantities is different on account of a variation of local opportunities than to add rent to the cost where the immediate cost is naturally less than the value of the product. All men are then upon an equitable plane regarding the gifts of nature; and none can, as none should in this respect, have an advantage that is not similarly enjoyed by all. (12)
Egoist.
(1) A physical conflict may or may not occur. The probability
of it is inversely proportional to the amount of education
in economics and social science acquired by the people
prior to the inauguration of the conditions supposed. If
government should be abruptly and entirely abolished to-morrow,
there would probably ensue a series of physical conflicts about
land and many other things, ending in reaction and a revival
of the old tyranny. But if the abolition of government shall
take place gradually, beginning with the downfall of the money
and land monopolies and extending thence into one field after
another, it will be accompanied by such a constant acquisition
and steady spreading of social truth that, when the time shall
come to apply the voluntary principle in the supply of police
protection, the people will rally as promptly and universally to
the support of the protector who acts most nearly in accordance
with the principles of social science as they now rally to
the side of the assaulted man against his would-be murderer.
In that case no serious conflict can arise.
(2) Egoist neglects to consider my statement in reply to him in the last issue of Liberty, to the effect that the source of the protector's power lies precisely in the patronage. The protector who is most patronized will, therefore, be the strongest; and the people will endow with their power the protector who is best fitted to use it in the administration of justice. (3) That is to say, if the masses, or any large section of them, after having come to an understanding and acceptance of Anarchism, should then be induced by the sophistry of tyrants to reject it again, despotism would result. This is perfectly true. No Anarchist ever dreamed of denying it. Indeed, the Anarchist's only hope lies in his confidence that people who have once intelligently accepted his principle will "stay put."
(4) The present State cannot be an outgrowth of Anarchy, because Anarchy, in the philosophic sense of the word, has never existed. For Anarchy, after all, means something more than the possession of liberty. Just as Ruskin defines wealth as "the possession of the valuable by the valiant," so Anarchy may be defined as the possession of liberty by libertarians,—