our new publishing platform allows readers to set up their own blogs at samsonblinded.org/blog/Your name

Should any of you be interested in that opportunity, drop me a note at nospam @ samsonblinded.org or via the comment form.

Anarchy must be properly understood as the absence of a compulsory legal system rather than the absence of laws. In this theory, anarchism allows people to submit to a system of laws as long as they do so freely. Anarchism is not a long-discredited idea of social contract: nation-states force their citizens to accept their laws. But what if nation-states were to be replaced with small, fiercely competing jurisdictions? What if each town could set its own legal system? What if people could choose between free-market and communist towns, between religious and libertarian communities?

The anarchist ideal is satisfied if people can freely and inexpensively move to a jurisdiction of their choice. Since cultural environment is an important part of personal identity, and laws defend cultural environment, anarchism must allow people to embrace legislation if they want to. The anarchist challenge is to make the legal system compulsory, but free. This paradox can be solved by proposing a system of competing mini-jurisdictions. As long as a person can freely and inexpensively choose a jurisdiction for himself or herself, and as long as jurisdictions compete for new citizens, people can be said to embrace laws of their own volition.

This version of anarchism produces interesting consequences: Israeli Jews could form their private communities and exclude Arabs, who would be entitled to act likewise in their own villages. Ultra-Orthodox Jews would be entitled to run gender-segregated buses inside their communities, but not on inter-city lines. Public religious observance might be different in Jerusalem’s religious quarters than in the Tel Aviv nightclub district.

Anarchism is a rejection of the monopoly on power exercised by nation-states. By their sheer size and their restrictions on immigration, nation-states suppress the people’s freedom to choose a jurisdiction. In the world of nation-states, changing the jurisdiction in which one lives is generally prohibitively expensive. Not so in an anarchist society built along biblical lines.

The Torah’s ideal is not monarchy, but a network of towns governed by elected judges with almost no legislative powers. Classical anarchist authors would have been proud of such an arrangement.

Though orthodox anarchist theory proclaims the absence of laws, it cannot make people free because armed commissars would quickly become the law. Indeed, they are the first ones to support antinomial anarchism as they do not want to be bound by laws. On the contrary, only a wise system of laws can make people free. But there is no single definition of wisdom, and anarchism dictates that everyone should be able to choose a wisdom for himself. Such choice is only attainable when many different jurisdictions exist side-by-side and compete for potential residents. This type of anarchism can be described as a rejection of monopolistic jurisdiction.

The essays also touch on the economic ethics of anarchism. If biblical commandments are any guide, then a slightly mitigated free market is the most moral economic system. “Slightly” is the key word: anarchism cannot be made into an absolute doctrine, for any absolute theory is unworkable. Rather, the freedom of anarchism must be mitigated at the fringes to remove marginal negative effects.

Finally, the essays deal with the anarchist transformation of existing societies. Instead of opposing these societies’ negative traits—such as corruption, political irresponsibility, and election fraud—liberal anarchists would want to institutionalize those traits, thus allowing for their efficient regulation, given the impossibility of extirpating them.

The Ethics of Decent Society – liberal and anarchist aspects of the contemporary societies.
The Ethics of Free Market – biblical ethics and liberal political theory in the context of anarchism.
The Ethics of Free Society – polemics with anarcho-communists and the high moral ground of the almost free enterprise.

It is hard to discriminate among the many worthy Jewish charities in Israel. I wouldn’t suggest the Jewish charities which cater to yeshivas or generic social issues: some of them are worthy Jewish charities, but their charitable causes are popular and such Israeli charities generally have no shortage of donors. There are narrow segments of Jewish charities to which our readers are likely to donate, but which others would as likely skip in distributing their donations.

I suggest that prospective donors, Jews and non-Jews alike, consider donating to three types of Israeli charities. One category is the charities that help conservative Jews: the extremely poor Jewish families who pioneer the settlements in Judea and Samaria, Jewish soldiers and policemen tried in Israeli courts for using firearms against their Palestinian enemies, helping the families of conservative Jews imprisoned for political expression in Israel, and similar charitable causes.

The second category of good Jewish charities includes conservative activism: developing Jewish self-defense groups in the villages of Judea and Samaria, increasing the Jewish presence in nationally and strategically important places such as Hebron, or spreading real Jewish values such as Meir Kahane’s writings and nationalist Judaism untainted by political correctness.

The third category of Jewish charities is possibly the best of them all, and is so far represented by a single Israeli charity, The Friends of Efrat. This is the smartest Jewish charity around, worthy of any donor’s attention. This Jewish charity unites everyone. It’s neither right nor left, neither religious nor atheistic. The Friends of Efrat charity does something every Jew would agree to: bring more Jewish babies into Israel. And the charity does so with extreme efficiency and righteousness: they gather information from Israeli hospitals on unfortunate Jewish women scheduled for abortions. Most of these Jewish women opt for the terrible procedure because of monetary constraints and fear of raising children alone. The Friends of Efrat charity offers the women help, advice, and small financial aid to purchase the first necessities for the Jewish child. The charity maintains zero overhead as it employs only volunteers, and its efficiency is staggering: less than $1,000 for an extra Jewish child. Your $1,000 donation to the charity translates into you bringing up a new Jewish baby in Israel.

Given enough money, Friends of Efrat can do the most important job of any Jewish or Israeli charity: bring tens of thousands of additional Jewish babies to life every year. The charity is pro-choice in the ultimate sense of the word: they help Jewish women overcome anxiety and their immediate financial constraints, and make a true, free choice whether to bring up a Jewish child.

If you want to donate to a great Jewish charity, look at the Friends of Efrat.

Feel free to post your own articles to the forum and discuss them. You can even start your own subforum and moderate it exclusively. Drop me a comment and I will set up a subforum for you.

Have a happy and prosperous new year!

Here is an exceptionally good humanitarian cause: Friends of Efrat. They provide small financial support to prospective Jewish mothers who would otherwise have abortions. The organization employs only volunteers and maintains nearly no overhead. It is perhaps the best purely humanitarian organization I have in years.