Anarchism and anthropology go well together because anthropologists know that a society without a state is possible because so many exist.

The notion that a society could be regulated entirely by market forces is a utopian fantasy: an impossible dream generated by imagining what the world would be like if everyone's behavior was utterly consistent with some abstract moral ideal-in this case, economic theories that assume all human action is based on calculating, systematic, (but scrupulously law-abiding), greed.

Revolutionary constituencies always involve a tacit alliance between the least alienated and the most oppressed.

As it turns out, we don't "all" have to pay our debts. Only some of us do.

Adam Smith actually took all his best ideas and lines from sources from medieval Persia. But one thing he doesn't take is the underlying assumption they have that the basis of a market is mutual aid.

There are markets extending from Mali, Indonesia, way outside the purview of any one government which operated under civil laws, so contracts weren't, except on trust. So they have this free market ideology the moment they have markets operating outside the purview of the states, as prior to that markets had really mainly existed as a side effect of military operations.

Direct action is, ultimately, the defiant insistence on acting as if one is already free.