 Good morning, Mr. Shanklin. This is Stefan Kinsella, taking my morning walk. Thought I'd drop you a little line about anarcho-capitalism, or as I prefer to call it, anarcho-libertarianism. I am an anarcho-capitalist. I'm an attorney in Houston. I'm a writer and editor and founder of the Libertarian Papers Journal and of the Center for the Study of Innovative Freedom, which is my primary vehicle for fighting intellectual property, which I really don't like, and I am a patent attorney as well. I've been an anarchist for a long time, I'd say since the late 80s, since I was in law school, primarily of the Hopian Rothbardian variety, also a big follower of Mises and Praxeology and Mises' style of Austrian economics. I tend not to use the word anarcho-capitalist that much anymore, primarily because our left libertarian comrades have sort of succeeded in tarnishing the word a little bit worse than it even it was before. So I tend to prefer to call myself an anarcho-libertarian or anarchist-libertarian, or just libertarian, which I think is anarchist, a consistent real libertarian has to be an anarchist. The reason is the primary fundamental reason to be a libertarian is really a type of benevolence. It's love for your fellow man. It's a preference, a deep preference for cooperation, the division of labor, empathy for others, peace and prosperity. And if you have those basic civilized preferences or values and you have a little bit of economic literacy and consistency, then you have to finally realize that a private property respecting system is the only one that's justified and compatible with those basic goals. So the libertarian is someone who hates aggression. Aggression means the violent invasion of the borders of others' bodies or other scarce resources that they acquire in life, which is why the Lockean rule of property acquisition, combined with contract, combined with contract, is the only justified type of system. So what this means is that the libertarian opposes all forms of aggression, but that of course means that we oppose both private crime and we oppose what you can call public crime or institutionalized violence. And as Liza and her spooner and others have observed, you know, the state is the big aggressor out there. The state is institutionalized violence. Unfortunately, it is seen as legitimate by most people, which is why it's institutionalized and able to get away with all that it does. Whereas your average person wouldn't put up with the same kind of acts performed by a private criminal because we don't regard them as legitimate. So the libertarian, of course, has to oppose private crime, but the problem is when you have menarchists or non-libertarians who also oppose private crime, and their solution is to set up a big public criminal, the government, the state, as the means to stop private crime. Of course, it doesn't do a good job at that anyway. It actually creates more crime in addition to engaging in crime itself, mass theft, murder, war, destruction of property, and so on. So we basically have a situation where you have people in favor of an institutionalized criminal as the means to counter private crime. The libertarian has to oppose both private crime and especially the state. The state is the big enemy, as Nock said, our enemy, the state. So I am an anarchist libertarian because I'm a libertarian. I oppose the state because I oppose aggression. The state is an agency that inherently commits aggression. It has to to exist. It's part of what it does. It either has to do one of two things. It has to have a monopoly on the use of force in a given region, or it has to tax. Either one implies the other actually, and in almost every case the government does both, of course. So both of those actions are aggression. Taxation is theft. And outlawing competing agencies is also a type of aggression because you're using force against someone who did not initiate force. So this is why the libertarian, anyone who's really in favor of peace and prosperity, harmony, social cooperation, and has a love for their fellow man, a benetarian you might call us, benevol, benevoliterian maybe, or benevoliterian, people that are benevolent instead of belevolent, right? People that are not missing throats. People that love their fellow man, they love society, and they prefer peace and prosperity, have to oppose aggression, have to support private property rights, and have to oppose the state, as I do.