The VoluntaryistWhole Number 129 'If one takes care of the means, the end will take care of itself 2nd Quarter 2006

The Unconquered Remnant:The Hopis and Voluntaryism

By Peter Spotswood DillardWhat is the oldest voluntaryist society existing

in the continental United States? The answer maysurprise you.

Perched atop three mighty mesas in northeast-ern Arizona, the Hopi Indians have developed apeaceful, nonviolent, and anarchistic society that hasendured for at least a millennium. Archaeologists be-lieve that the Hopis are descendants of the prehis-toric Anasazi, or "Old Ones," who occupied the FourCorners region before disappearing in the late 13thcentury. Hopi tradition teaches that their people as-cended into the present world through a hole in thebottom of the Grand Canyon called Sipapuni. Theysoon met Maasaw, ruler of this world, who dividedthem into clans and instructed them to find the cen-ter of the earth. After wandering for many years, theclans converged on the Hopi mesas. The Bear Clanestablished the Third Mesa village of Oraibi and re-quired the other clans to demonstrate some skill orspecial knowledge before establishing their own vil-lages.

There is no "Hopi Nation." Before the U.S. Warwith Mexico, when the Mexican government decidedto make a boundary around the Hopi country, the"Hopi thought the boundary lines to be so ridiculousthat they laughed about it." [Yamada 20] "The HopiNation" is simply a bureaucratic fiction imposed bythe Spanish, Mexican, and United States govern-ments in order to deal with a group of people whoseancestors have always lived in a decentralized col-lection of independent and autonomous villages. Asanthropologist Wayne Dennis remarked, "The nativesystem of [Hopi] government is, in effect, a practicalform of anarchy." [Hennacy, 200]. Hopi unity is ex-pressed, not in allegiance to a monolithic Hopi state,but through voluntary commitment to a commonspirituality known as the Hopi Way. Even here, theclan structure ensures that spiritual authority doesnot become concentrated in the hands of any oneperson or group. Each clan possesses its own exper-tise or ceremony indispensable to the Hopi Way. Hopiclans are matrilineal, with members of a given clanliving in different villages whose inhabitants are alsoconnected by ties of marriage, kinship, and sharedhistory.

Nothing for certain is known about how decisionsare made in the village councils and sacred kivas.

Nevertheless, a statement from Heremequaftewa ofShungopavi village provides a window onto what isessentially a voluntaryist philosophy:

The Hopi knows it is not right to go abouttrying to change people who have religiousbeliefs that are different from their own, andhe will not try to force them to follow the Hopiway of life. I would not try to force the youngpeople of the white man to live and believemy way. I will not even force my own youngpeople to be initiated into our religious soci-eties. I will only ask them if they want to joinor be initiated into them. If they say "no," itwill be respected. This is the very basis of ourlife, we must not force other people to changetheir ways? [Yamada, 55].

Heremequaftewa's statement indicates a form of de-cision making in which no arms are twisted(authoritarianism) and no votes are taken(majoritarianism), but a voluntary unanimity amongindividuals is sought. Thus, Hopi decision makingresembles the traditional village councils of otherSouthwestern Indian tribes, such as the Pima andthe Tohono O'odham. However, it could be best com-pared to the Quaker "sense of the meeting," in whichthe group attempts to find unity, and where the prin-cipled dissent of even one individual is enough toprevent the meeting from moving forward on a givenmatter.

Geographical factors have blessed the Hopis witha strong natural defense against invaders. The nameHopi, which means peaceful, has always been indica-tive of a people who shied away from war. The HopiWay forbids fighting and killing, and there have beennumerous Hopi conscientious objectors and draftresisters, since they were granted U.S. citizenship in1924. [Waters, 317,332; Clemmer, 198; Bonvillain,l4]As one of their traditional leaders, Dan Katchongvawrote, the Hopi must not participate in war. "It isthe only way we can get right with the Great Spirit.If we turn loose our bow and arrow on anyone, wewill receive an even greater tragedy than our vic-tim." [Yamada, 46] Fortunately, the remoteness oftheir region and its scant natural resources have dis-couraged the incursion of greedy aggressors. Six thou-sand feet above sea level, and accessible only by twist-ing roads and torturous switchbacks, the mesas arewell nigh impregnable fortresses. Rarely have theHopis resorted to military force, a notable exceptionbeing their participation in the Pueblo Revolt againstthe despotic Spanish in 1680. Perhaps the tragedy

continued on page 4

The VoluntaryistEditor: Carl Watner

Subscription InformationPublished quarterly by The Voluntaryists, P.O. Box 275,

Gramling, SC 29348. A six-issue subscription is $20 or .07ounce of fine gold. For overseas postage, please add $5 or V3 ofthe regular subscription price. Single back issues are $4 eachor 7Ö of the regular subscription price. Please check the numberon your mailing label to see when you should renew.

See www.voluntaryist.com [V]

An "Open Letter on Taxes"By Ammon Hennacy

[Editor's Note": Ammon Hennacy (1893-1970) was aself-described Christian-anarchist and pacifist, au-thor of THE BOOK OF AMMON (1965) and THEONE-MAN REVOLUTION IN AMERICA (1970). Theexpression the "one man revolution" was taken fromRobert Frost's poem "Build Soil - A Political Pasto-ral" (part of which follows) -

You see the beauty of my proposal isIt needn't wait on a general revolution.I bid you to a one man revolution —The only revolution that is coming.

The following letter appeared in THE CATHOLICWORKER, February 1953, page six. It was addressedto Mr. William P. Stuart, Collector of Internal Rev-enue, Phoenix, AZ. While there are a number of state-ments in this "open letter" which voluntaryists mightquestion (for example, Hennacy opposes taxes be-cause the money supports war, not because taxes aretheft; and he blames overproduction on the free mar-ket), Hennacy, and the Catholic Workers with whichhe was associated, must be respected for acting outtheir principles and living consistently with theirideals.]

Dear Mr. Stuart:I am refusing for the ninth consecutive year to

pay my income tax. I suppose that you are awarethat my action is taken for the same reason that Ihave refused to pay all along: namely, that most ofthis tax goes for war and the upkeep of an unholyand un-Christian social system. The philosophy uponwhich my action is based is that of the Christiananarchist, who regards all government as based uponthe return of evil for evil in courts, legislatures, andprisons. Opposition to all government is therefore anecessary part of the daily life of one who seeks tofollow the Sermon on the Mount. As all churchesuphold the state, I do not belong to any church, butattend mass and pray for grace and wisdom becauseof my love and respect for Dorothy Day and RobertLudlow, editor of the CATHOLIC WORKER. This wasthe first publication to support my non-payment oftaxes. Its basis of voluntary poverty and manual la-bor on the land I accept as an integral part of my life

as a revolutionary Christian.A hundred years ago the test of whether a person

was socially conscious or not was whether he sup-ported slavery or opposed it. Practically all the goodreligious people justified ownership of slaves by quo-tations from the Bible. Northerners whose fortuneswere based upon the slave trade denounced WilliamLloyd Garrison, the abolitionist. (Garrison was alsothe first Christian Anarchist. Tolstoy having beenencouraged in this direction by Garrison's famousPeace Declaration in Boston in 1838, in which allgovernment was considered anti-Christian.) Mr.Stuart, your ancestors as well as mine, likely hidescaped slaves and helped them get to freedom inCanada. The law said that escaped slaves should bereturned to their masters, but good Quakers brokethe law.

Today the measure of social consciousness iswhether we support war and conscription. All think-ing people must admit that the state is a Monster - aMonster of corruption and inefficiency, a Juggernautthat crushes freedom, that regiments us from cradleto the grave, supposedly for our own good. Yet, whilemost churches grudgingly allow members to be con-scientious objectors, they all with the exception, gen-erally speaking, of Quakers, Mennonites, andBrethern [sic], support war when it comes. And, withvery few exceptions, all pacifists pay taxes for war.They may wish to do differently, but the reason theypay up is because they are so attached to the com-forts of capitalism that they dislike to inconveniencethemselves for an ideal. People who thus know bet-ter but do not do better are properly classified aspipsqueaks [sic]. Peter Maurin, the French peasant,founder of the Catholic Worker movement, said that"he who is a pensioner of the state, is a slave of thestate."

The Christian Anarchist patterns his life afterthat of the early Christians. He does not vote for of-ficials or go to courts to get even with those who maywrong him; neither does he need a cop to make himbehave. He wants no social security benefits or pen-sion. As Dorothy Day says of my refusal to pay taxes,in her recent book, THE LONG LONELINESS(Harcourt, 1952): "as he does not accept from Cae-sar, he does not render to Caesar." Instead of oppos-ing war and the state most people fall for this BIGLIE.

Hitler said that if you said it loud enough andoften enough THE BIG LIE could be put across. Heproved it for the duration of his despotism, whichfell somewhat short of the 1,000 years that he hadplanned. With our loyalty oaths we are adopting themethods of Hitler. With our lack of moral perceptionwe double-talk on our Voice of America and throwour dollars over the world thinking it will cover upour imperialism in Puerto Rico and our continueddespoilation of the American Indian. By calling the

continued on page 6

Page 2 2nd Quarter 2006

The Father's StickBy Peter Ragnar

In the dark shadow of the father's stick, a childtrembles —perhaps not so much from the threatenedpain, as from the fear his will might be broken. Asthis rare innocence matriculates into manhood, herealizes true freedom is control of self. As he becomesan adult, he must become a self-responsible indi-vidual; for with responsibility comes authority. Healone has authority over himself. "No man hath powerover his rights and liberties, nor he over any otherman's." He grants no government the right of aggres-sion; he makes no concession to servitude; he grantsno one the power to punish him for his vices, or toreward him for his virtues. For the harshest judgehe will ever meet will be the conscience of his ownmind.

His ultimate pleasure is freedom from coercivemolestation. His greatest joy is the cultivation of vir-tue. His summum bonum, the supreme goodness, ishis right of peaceful, voluntary, action. Now he nolonger fears the father's stick. He realizes each per-son must conclude what is conducive to, and what isdestructive of, personal liberty. Each person musthave the freedom to learn from his own mistakes anddecide on a proper course of action. Each person mustlive under the guidance of his own judgment. Eachperson must have the freedom to pursue his ownhappiness. And each person must grant such equalrights to others!

"Ah! Beautiful and lofty, such high ideals,'' you say,"But what about the needs of a society? Isn't thatwhy governments are created in the first place?"

"But," I retort, "These needs are most effectivelymet by voluntary trade and agreement among indi-viduals unhindered by force." Human rights can onlybe respected by the voluntary cooperation of a freepeople. "Between men there can only exist two rela-tions: logic and war." If other men cannot convince orpersuade you to change your course of action, thenthey must either leave you alone (to go your own way)or force you to go along with them. If they refuse to"prove" themselves to you then you are under attackand "every means will be used to make you obey"(from the threat of the father's stick to manipulativepropaganda).

What is government? Does it embrace logic orwar? The other day at the store the checkout clerkasked if I'd like to give a dollar for a particular cause.I quietly smiled and said, "No thank you." Was Ithreatened with a fine, jail time, or physical violence?Of course not! Why? Because my compliance wasvoluntary. However, if I were stopped by the policefor not wearing my seat belt, I'd have trouble on myhands. It doesn't matter that I've driven safely forover 50 years. It doesn't matter that I've never hadan auto accident. And it doesn't matter if this hap-pens to be the first time in all those years that I

wasn't wearing my belt. But it does matter that I ambeing coerced into buckling up!

So, what is government? It is nothing but force\'What gives government its power? - the cooperationof the people. Remove cooperation and you've justgiven government an orchidectomy, turning it intoan impotent eunuch. Yet the real crime, the collu-sion of the mindless collective, still remains veiled.Its members are fully culpable through their com-plicity, their criminal participation. Each should bemade individually responsible for the acts of the gov-ernment. Yet ask anyone to sign a legal contract ofaccountability, and not one out of a million wouldput his or her signature on the line. What does thattell you?

If you refuse to cooperate with the "voluntary com-pliance" sought by the IRS, you will eventually bemet with force. That force is successful, however, onlyif enough of the crowd grants their tacit support tothose supercilious and odious officials. And if youhaven't been repulsed by the sycophantic politicalparty-liners or your local electorate, please take acloser look. Do self-owned sovereigns ingratiate them-selves through flattery and servility? Do they crouchfawningly at the shadow of the father's stick? Neverwill they stoop so low!

Oh, I can hear it now. You are saying to yourself,"It sounds like he's against authority and the pow-ers of government. Every nation's inhabitants mustobey its rules. That's why you have to pay your taxes,vote, and support its wars that bring democracy andpeace to the less fortunate. I think he's just shirkinghis responsibility as an American!"

Yes, I am against authority—unlawful authority.It is unlawful to force another to act against his will,to violate his conscience. It is unlawful to cause any-one to violate nature's law. It is unlawful for any bodyof people or any individual to trespass against hisneighbors. It is unlawful not to keep your word. Andit is unlawful to wittingly or unwittingly, willinglyor unwillingly, engage in (or even condone) the tradeof stolen properties, (properties taken from peopleby the force of law) and to conspire (or even associ-ate) with the criminals who do so. In other words, itis immoral to accept money from the government thatit has illegally confiscated from others.

Am I opposed to government? I'm familiar withonly two types. One is imposed by others from theoutside; it is called political government. The secondcomes from inside oneself, and is called self-govern-ment. The first is coercive, the second is voluntary.The first is unproductive (as world history evidences);the second is highly productive, as it provides theworld with one improved human unit.

As for birth in a certain geographic area justify-ing the imposition of taxation, that's absurd! First,all taxation is theft (since it is involuntary). Second,everybody must be born somewhere. It's like sayingall children born belong to the government, not the

2nd Quarter 2006 Page 3

parents. Who gives government the right of owner-ship over that which it didn't produce? In fact, whatproduct does any government ever produce but war?Since war is the rule of force, all government is butforce, and the shadow of its stick is always on theground before us. If peace is the negation of force,then government and peace will remain eternal an-tagonists. And thus, it is inane and puerile thinkingto expect that freedom can be obtained or even de-fended by force. As you sow shall you reap! And asyou take care of the means, the end takes care ofitself!

Destruction can never give birth to freedom, anymore than freedom can engage in enslavement. Topossess freedom, you must grant freedom. Thefather's stick must be grafted back to the tree of life.Once a bold warrior met a sage, and, attempting toimpress the sage with his martial arts prowess, hecleaved off a limb from a nearby tree in a blindingdisplay of swordsmanship. Nonplussed, the sagepointed at the limb's stump and retorted, "Now if youreally want to impress me, show me your power bymaking it grow back together."

Through time immemorial, every government hasfailed to produce either peace or freedom. The onlyproduction in which it engages is fraud, destruction,deception, and force. It wields the father's stick in anattempt to bully the nation's populace to support itscriminal activities. For to take that which is not givenfreely, either by force or intimidation, is criminal.Likewise, support of any kind lent to that which can-not be legitimized is criminal as well.

The issue is blatantly obvious. Coercion is crimi-nal. It is a criminal act for you to be forced to give upyour money, goods, products, labor, time, or your lifewithout voluntary consent. It is criminal for a singleindividual to force you, and just as criminal for amillion people to force you! It is as criminal for arobber to force you as it is for a government to forceyou! It is criminal collusion to approve and endorsesuch heinous acts against one's neighbors. And it isequally repugnant and abominable to allow yourselfto be cowed by the father's stick when wielded by agovernment which threatens you with it. ÖZ1

The Unconquered Remnant:The Hopis and Voluntaryism

continued from page 1at Awatovi, in which men from the villages of Walpi,Shungopavi, and Oraibi attacked and destroyed theChristianized village of Awatovi in 1700, turned mostHopis' hearts against the use of violence. The Hopiare probably one of the few Indian tribes that havenever fought a war against the United States gov-ernment, nor promised to be subject to its jurisdic-tion. [Hennacy, 199]

Conflicts are usually resolved without bloodshed.

Faced by irreconcilable disagreements, Hopis prefergoing their separate ways rather than fighting to thedeath. An example is the 1906 split at Oraibi betweenthe traditionalists and the progressives. Yukiuma,the leader of the traditionalists, drew a line in thesand and stepped across it, saying that if theprogressives could push him back over the line thenthe traditionalists would leave Oraibi, but that if theycouldn't then the progressives would have to leave.Yukiuma's supporters lined up behind him, theprogressives lined up behind their leader, and a shov-ing match ensued. Several hours later, Yukiuma wasfinally pushed over the line. True to his word, he andthe other traditionalists promptly left Oraibi.

Concerning property, for centuries the Hopis havepracticed a form of anarcho-communism. Lands wereowned collectively by various clans, after having beenpartitioned and distributed by the Bear Clan. Un-like more virulent forms of communism, which re-gard the institution of private property as an inher-ent evil to be eradicated by any means necessary,the Hopis never attempted to impose their systemupon anyone else. Unfortunately, their exemplarytolerance was not reciprocated.

In 1848, under the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo,the U. S. government took control of the Hopi landsfrom the Mexican government. The Hopi Indian Res-ervation was established "forever" by a PresidentialExecutive Order in 1882. A few years later, in 1890,without consulting the Hopis, the U.S. Congresspassed the Dawes Act, which allotted to each Hopifamily 100 acres of land with title of ownership. Sincethere were only a few hundred Hopi families andallotment sizes were never increased, millions of left-over acres were sold to white settlers for a huge profit.In engineering this spectacular rip-off of the Hopis,Congress apparently forgot that legislation imposedwithout consent was the prime reason their ances-tors declared their independence from Great Brit-ain.

Shortly prior to the land allotment fiasco, the U.S.government had initiated a program of compulsoryschooling that affected the Hopis. A number of Hopiparents were arrested, and even imprisoned, whenthey refused to comply with orders to send their chil-dren to government-run schools. Their children werethen kidnapped and forced to attend Indian agencyday and boarding schools where they were indoctri-nated into Christianity and Anglo-American culture.The conflict between the traditional and progressiveHopis began at this time, when some Hopis refusedto cooperate, while other Hopis adopted those of thewhite man's ways they deemed beneficial. The fun-damental moral issue, however, was not whether cer-tain aspects of white culture were beneficial, butwhether any Hopi, traditionalist or progressive,should have been forced to adopt them. Certainlynone of us would acquiesce to compulsory educationby Martians visiting our planet, even if Martian cul-

Page 4 2nd Quarter 2006

ture were light years ahead of ours!These depredations culminated in the 1934 gov-

ernment decision to hold a referendum among theHopis to see if they would endorse a Tribal Councilto represent the Tribe, and accept a tribal constitu-tion, and by-laws. Much ink has been spilled overwhether the minimum 30% of eligible Hopi votersnecessary for the vote to be valid actually voted, withtraditionalist sympathizers (e.g., Waters) arguingthat only 29% voted and their progressive opponents(e.g., Page and Page) using lower total populationestimates to counter that 48% voted. Such numbercrunching is beside the point. No people steeped inthe voluntaryism of Heremequaftewa would regardvoting as a legitimate form of deciding any seriousmatter. Sadly, those willing to vote about whether toleave the traditional Hopi Way had already left it."By staying away from the vote, most Hopis showedtheir disapproval of the entire process," even thougha Tribal Council "was elected in 1935, and a formalconstitution was adopted the following year."[Bonvillain, 85] In referring to the referendum, Tho-mas Banyacya, a Hopi traditionalist, noted that "Asmall percentage of the [Hopi] population voted infavor of it, a slightly larger percentage voted againstit, but by far the largest percentage didn't vote at all.Yet it was forced upon us and its bitter fruits arebeing pushed down our throats even to this day."[1957]. [Yamada,6l]

The traditional Hopi argue that the United Statesgovernment has no authority over them because theHopis never signed a treaty "acknowledging the U.S.Government's right of existence." Nor do they recog-nize the right of the U.S. government or Christianmissionaries to pressure them to follow the whiteman's way of life. According to the traditionalists,the Hopi Tribal Council, which was brought into ex-istence as a creature of the U.S. government, "has noauthority beyond that granted by their politico-reli-gious leaders," such as the Kikmongwis and themongwis. [Clemmer, 190] During the late 1940s, thesetraditionalists refused to file any claims before theU.S. Government Lands Claim Commission "on theground that 'they had already claimed the wholeWestern Hemisphere long before Columbus' great-great grandmother was born. We will not ask a whiteman, who came to us recently, for a piece of land thatis already ours'." Nor would they "assent to having awhite man's court decide whether or not it belongedto them." [Waters 322, 324]

The traditional Hopi have always had an in-grained "trait of shying way from anything thatsmelled of government control." [Waters, 316] Theirleaders have protested against Hopi acceptance ofgovernment welfare because they believed that thegovernment would take away their land in returnfor government benefits, and that dependence uponthe government would destroy "the faith of the Hopisin their own independence and reliance upon their

Creator." [Waters, 327] Throughout the years, tradi-tionalist Hopi leaders have issued eloquent pleas forself-determination to U.S. presidents and other gov-ernment officials. When Yukuma met President Taftin 1911, the message he delivered was that "all hewanted was that he and his people be left alone."[Miller, 112] Forty years later, Dan Katchongva, ason of Yukiuma, was still delivering the same mes-sage:

Our people are a proud people. We have takengood care of ourselves and our land for thou-sands of years. We do not need any instruc-tion from the Indian Bureau either in gov-ernment or farming. If they want any instruc-tion from us, we will give it to them withoutcharge. [Yamada, 6].We want a right to live as we please, as hu-man beings. We want to have a right to wor-ship as we please and have our own land. Wedon't want to have someone plan our lives forus, issue us rations, social security or otherdole. [Yamada, 9]

Writing on behalf of the traditionalist leaders, GeorgeYamada echoed these powerful sentiments:

Self-determination is sovereignty—self-rule.Self-determination means that a people havethe sovereign right to determine and carryout their own destiny without any alien au-thority to say whether their acts are good forthem or not. Under self-determination apeople have a right to make their own mis-takes and be accounted for them. The IndianBureau cannot give self-determination to tHeHopi. All it can do is get out of the way. Forthe truth is, the Hopi want to run their ownlives, without a boss over them to restrict it.Nor do they want to boss anyone else around,.... [Yamada, 5].In a Meeting of Religious Peoples, August 4-5,

1955, Hopi religious leaders noted thatThe laws of the Great Spirit must be followedeven though they might conflict with other[political] "laws." All the various instructionsof the Great Spirit came from "the seed of onebasic instruction: 'You must not kill;you mustlove your neighbor as yourself From this onecommandment to respect and reverence life,came all the other commandments: To tell thetruth, to share what we have, to live togetherso we can help each other out, to take care ofour children and old people, the sick and thestrangers, friends and enemies, to not getdrunk, or commit adultery or lie or cheat, orsteal, or covet, or get rich because all of thesenegative acts cause fights and troubles whichdivide the community into groups too smallto support and carry on the life stream.[Yamada, 18]

In short, "the Hopis strive to live with their families

2nd Quarter 2006 Page 5

and neighbors according to these ideals of peace andcooperation. They believe that people should help oneanother, be generous and kind to those in need, andbe friendly and good-natured to all." [Bonvillain, 14]One would be hard-pressed to find a better state-ment of basic voluntaryist principles.

It would be an exaggeration to say that pure vol-untaryism flourishes everywhere on the Hopi mesastoday, or that the Hopis are a perfect people. Clearlymany Hopis have reached an accommodation withthe Tribal Council, the state of Arizona, and the U.S.government. Yet a formidable remnant of Yukiuma'straditionalist faction survives. More significantly,most Hopi progressives are members of the clans,which continue to oversee collective ownership oftribal lands, to maintain ceremonial life in a highlydecentralized manner, and to control access to sa-cred roads and shrines. The most important decisionsare made without voting, and violence is rejected asthe solution to all conflicts. Though not voluntaryistin letter, Hopi culture is certainly voluntaryist inspirit. And in all likelihood it will remain so a thou-sand years hence. 53

References:Bonvillain, Nancy. The Hopi. New York: Chelsea

House, 1994.Clemmer, Richard O. Roads in the Sky: The Hopi

Indians in a Century of Change. Boulder: WestviewPress, 1995.

Hennacy, Ammon. Chapter 12, *Yukeoma, TheHopi," in The One-Man Revolution in America. SaltLake City: Ammon Hennacy Publications, 1970.

Miller, Donald Eugene. The Limits of Schoolingby Imposition: The Hopi Indians of Arizona. Disser-tation presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree,The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, June 1987.

Page, Susanne and Jack Page. Hopi. New York:Abradale, 1982.

Waters, Frank. Book oƒ t̀he Hopi. New York Pen-guin Books, 1977.

Yamada, George. The Great Resistance, A HopiAnthology. New York: G. Yamada, 1957.

[I would like to thank Carl Watner for helpful-suggestions that improved this article.]

[[Editor's Note: The anarchistic nature of Hopisociety was first brought to my attention by my read-ing of Ammon Hennacy's THE BOOK OF AMMONin early 2005. When I mentioned this to the authorof this article, he stated that he was already awareof their native voluntaryism, had actually visited thethree Hopi mesas, and had read extensively aboutthem. I encouraged him to write an article about theHopis: this being the result. According to Patrick Coyin his chapter on Hennacy in A REVOLUTION OFTHE HEART (1988): "Few white people knew moreof the Hopi way of life than Hennacy; even fewer wereheld in higher esteem by the traditional Hopi. Theycounted him a brother. He ... championed the tradi-tional Hopi because they were his living model of a

pacifist, anarchist society. ... His respect [for them]ran deep enough to consider them 'the spiritual con-science of America'." [pp. 157-158].]]

An "Open Letter on Taxes"continued from page 2

communists names and linking up with the despots,Tito, Chiang, and Franco, we are not fooling the starv-ing millions of Asia. If all the communists were deadwe would still have the problem of capitalist over-production causing depressions and wars. Truman,MacArthur, Stalin, Churchill all vie in calling forpeace while preparing for war. Hitler and Mussolinisaid "Peace" too - again this is THE BIG LIE. With-out the income taxes, paid grudgingly by most people,THE BIG LIE of the capitalist imperialists who domi-nate our lives today would endure but for a moment.For one person to refuse to pay taxes will not stopwar but it may start a person here and there to ques-tion the whole setup of exploitation and the fallaciesof THE BIG LIE, which consist of:

1. The assertion that preparedness prevents war— The fact is that those countries which have hadthe greatest armies and greatest preparations for warhave gone down in defeat. Sparta, Rome, the GreatSpanish Empire, Germany, Japan, and now the Brit-ish Empire is on the skids. This country has becomepenurious at times because of the cost of armamentsbut its spirit has still been larceny minded. Accord-ingly after wars it has relaxed somewhat but has keptup the economic imperialism and diplomatic trick-ery which led right into another war. Today we arespending untold billions in upholding French andDutch imperialism in the Far East and our war inKorea has been a farce no matter which way you maylook at it. And we are making more bombs and get-ting into war deeper and deeper.

2. The assertion that the majority is always right— Benjamin Tucker anarchist editor of LIBERTYhalf a century ago, gave the answer to this illusionin unalterable logic: "If one man robs another, as doesa highwayman, that is theft and is wrong. If one manrobs all other men, as does a despot, that is wrong.But if all other men rob one man, as by the instru-ment of the ballot and majority rule, that also iswrong." In any moral issue the majority have alwaysbeen wrong. When the matter is no longer in disputethe majority will corrupt the good by their sheerweight of complacency and orthodoxy, as WilliamJames has told us in his incomparable VARIETIESOF RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. The strongest manin the world is not the dictator, but as Ibsen said, "hewho stands most alone." Thoreau put it, "that one onthe side of God is a majority."

3. The illusion that there has always been a stateand that it is necessary — This final installment ofTHE BIG LIE is so old that most people will die forit in the mistaken idea that they are helping them-

Page6 2nd Quarter 2006

selves. In the Bible it tells us that, "in those daysthere were no kings in Israel for each man did whatwas right in his own heart, "[sic] But the peoplewanted a king and asked Samuel for one. God toldSamuel to tell them that a king would make theirsons soldiers, "[sic] All the best of your lands and vine-yards and oliveyards he will take away ... you will behis slaves and when you cry out for redress againstthe king you have chosen for yourselves, the Lordwill not listen to you: you asked for a king."

If we were not demoralized by the gadgets of ourmaterialistic civilization and mesmerized by our chantof The American Way of Life we might be quiet for aminute and know that unless our fears and covetous-ness were not organized in a state they would neveramount to more than a McCoy Hatfield feud. It takes astate with taxes from Christians to make A Bombs. Ittakes a state with politicians seeking to keep in powerto make wars. It takes a state giving fat contracts andbig wages to make munitions for war. When this Mo lochdevours our children in the next war we need not cryto God for mercy, for we asked for it. We have beenwarned and would not listen.

If, Mr. Stuart, after your thought on these mat-ters for the several years I have been refusing to paytaxes here in Phoenix, you come to the point whereyou realize that "all is vanity and vexation of spirit"in this mad world, you may see fit to renounce yourpost as tax collector and join me in my exhortationto those who may not be able to live one more day asa prop to this dying system. Did you know that ErnestCrosby, who was Judge of the International Court ofClaims in Caiio, Egypt, resigned his job as jurist af-ter reading Tolstoy's THE KINGDOM OF`GOD ISWITHIN YOU, for which he was welcomed by Tolstoy,himself? Therefore for those of us who can take it[Jit is time to break away from THE BIG LIE. lakethe first step in refusing to make munitions; in re-fusing to register for war or military training; in re-fusing to buy government bonds which are truly slavebonds; and when you can get around to it, refuse topay income taxes. No matter what we have done to-ward living the ideal we should remember the wordsof St. Augustine: "As who says that he has cloneenough already has perished." 53

* * *P.S. I earned $1,701.91 in 1951.1 sent my younger

daughter at university $1,200; spent $225 on livingexpense; and the remainder on propaganda. I owe$192 in taxes, and you may rest assured that I as ananarchist, Mr. Stuart, will simply refuse to pay thetax and not resort to political influence to. avoid pay-ment.

"[T]he main hope of saving our country re-ally boils down to home education."

—Robert J. Ringer, RESTORING THEAMERICAN DREAM (NY: QED,1979), Chap. 9, p. 302.

Remarks on the Graduationof William Watner,

continued from page 8read his TEACH YOUR OWN in 1982. In lookingover my copy of that book, just last month, one pas-sage that I had highlighted almost 25 years agojumped out at me. John Holt wrote that "We can sumup very quickly what people need to teach their ownchildren."

First of all, they have to like them, enjoy theircompany, their physical presence, their energy,foolishness, and passion. They have to enjoyall their talk and questions, and enjoy equallytrying to answer those questions. They haveto think of their children as friends, indeedvery close friends, have to feel happier whenthey are near and miss them when they areaway. They have to trust them as people, re-spect their fragile dignity, treat them withcourtesy, take them seriously. They have tofeel in their own hearts some of theirchildren's wonder, curiosity, and excitementabout the world. And they have to haveenough confidence in themselves, skepticismabout the experts, and willingness to be dif-ferent from most people, to take on themselvesthe responsibility for their children's learn-ing, [p. 57]I think that passage speaks eloquently about the

relationship Julie and I have had with William andour other children, and it highlights our enjoymentand passion for homeschooling them. Homeschoolinghas allowed us to follow our consciences, and instillall of the ideals and principles we think to be of high-est importance without having them torn down orattacked by someone else. To us, that is the realbeauty of John Holt's idea to "teach your own."

Shortly after William was born at home I wrotean article titled "'It's Only Just a Beginning': Re-flections on Being A New Father" (see THE VOL-UNTARYIST No. 26, June 1987). William, as Ipresent }̂ ou with your homeschool graduation di-ploma this afternoon, I know you realize you aremoving onward in life. In that article I observedthat it was my hope that you would learn to thinkindependently and logically, and above all, to acthonestly and with integrity. I believe you haveaccomplished that and I am proud of that accom-plishment and everything else you have achievedin your first 18 years of life. In homeschooling you,your mother and I have done our best to arm youwith the truth because the truth is the most pow-erful thing in the world. As I give you this diplomaI hope you always ?ling to the truth and remem-ber that one word of truth outweighs the world.Congratulations William, and keep up the goodwork! S3

2nd Quarter 2006 Page 7

Remarks on the Graduationof William Watner,Homeschooler - June 4,2005

By Carl WatnerFd like to begin my remarks this afternoon by talk-

ing a little bit about responsibility. Our responsibil-ity as parents is something we sometimes may notwant, but it is a charge that Nature places upon us.We may try to shed accountability but ultimately weare responsible for ourselves, our families, and ourchildren. For me, homeschooling has been my way ofresponding to the obligation I have to educate mychildren.

We often forget that parents were (and still are)directly responsible for the education of their chil-dren. This was the norm throughout most of Ameri-can history. In the days before mass public school-ing, a large percentage of this country's children wereeducated at home, or in private or religiously-affili-ated schools chosen and paid for by their parents.The right to homeschool, to engage a private instruc-tor, or to send a child to a private school all stemmedfrom the parents' responsibility to care for and teachtheir children. The idea that anyone could interferein the fulfillment of that obligation would have in-censed most parents during most of our country'shistory.

My own interest in homeschooling came aboutlong before I was married. I attended 11 years ofpublic schools in Maryland and intuitively thoughtthere had to be a better way to learn than mass pub-lic schooling. Not only were the schools I attendedrun by the government and paid for by compulsorytaxes, but I came to realize that I was being indoctri-nated in collectivist and statist ideas. Unfortunately,I encountered the same ideas in college. After muchmature reflection, I came to the conclusion that gov-ernment-directed schooling was (and is) a moral andpractical failure.

Homeschooling, on the other hand, has been ahuge success for our family. It has taught each childthat the price of accomplishment is hard work. Theyhave seen their mother, Julie, with her nose to thegrindstone: preparing lesson plans, editing papers,and doing all the other myriad tasks that have goneinto their schooling and unschooling programs. Al-though we are here to celebrate student graduation,let us not forget that homeschooling demands thededication of the parents, especially the mothers.Julie, would you please come up to the podium. BothWilliam and I want to share with you our thanks for,your integral part in the homeschooling process. Weiwant you to know how grateful we are for your partin it. Everybody, let's give Julie a round of applause.

My first exposure to the idea of homeschoolingwas probably through the books of John Holt. I first

continued on page 7

The VohintaryistP.O. Box 275 · Gramling, South Carolina 29348

rL

¯ij

FIRST CLASSPlease renew your subscription if the number on youraddress label is within one digit of this issue's number.

Page 8 2nd Quarter 2006