Overthrowingthe Anarchists 307bit of it to myself.I availnoneof the evidenceto the generalpublicfor scrutiny.ThenI
brutallybeatup Rileyor razehis domicile.In sucha scenarioit is not unlikelythatsome
membersof the publicwillconcludethatI fabricatedaccusationsagainstRileyas a pre-
text for spoliatinghim.Thenthosemembersof the publiccan themselvesbecomevigi-
lanteswhowieldviolenceuponme, believingtheirownactionto be avengingthe spolia-
tion that I committedagainstRiley.Andthe violencewouldgo on.
Andthereis additionalsignificanceto everycourtcasebeingpublicinformation;this
is a safeguardagainstwrongfulprosecution.Whena publictribunalprovesRiley’s guilt,
that is intendedto satisfythe onlookersthat Riley’s consequentimprisonmentis just.That
discourageswould-be vigilantesfromattemptingto rectifymisperceivedinjusticeby
springingguiltymenfromprison.ShouldRileybe falselyconvicted,basedon errorsof
the juryor prosecutorialprocedure,any vigilantattorneycan examinethe recordsof the
caseand file an appeal.
I lovemoviesandcomicbooksaboutheroicvigilantes.Unfortunately,I am guessing
thatpeoplewatchtoo manyof thesefilmsand readtoo manyof thesecomics,giventhat
theyseemto assumethatvigilantesare generallyheroic.Whenwe examinehistory,
vigilantesusuallyturnout to be dirtyrottencutthroatswhohurtinnocentpeople.Al
Caponewasa real-lifevigilante.A real-lifevigilanteorganizationis the Ku KluxKlan.It
promisesto “protect” whitesfrompeopleof otherraces.Everyangrymobof private
citizensthatfalselyaccuseda blackmanof rape—andimmediatelylynchedhim—was
comprisedof vigilantes.Suchlynchmobskill innocentpeopleas a directresultof the
lynchmob’s refusalto abideby the rulesof due processthat no partybut a constitutional-
ly republicangovernmentcan administer.Thisillustratesthatour ownsocietywouldbe
an oppressiveone if the governmentdid not requireeveryone—policemenandprivate
citizensalike—to abideby the Fifthand FourthAmendmentsduringtheirinvestigations.
My opinionon civildisobedienceis this.The degreeto whichsomeoneis morallyright
to engagein vigilanteactionsis inverselyproportionalto the extentto whichhe dwellsin
a nightwatchmanstate.To the extentthat he suffersundercorruptionor governism,such
as in a Third-Worldkleptocracy,a personcannotrelyon the Stateto punishspoliation.
For thatreason,it is incumbentuponprivatecitizensto try to meteout whateverprivate
justiceis possibleto them.Yet, the degreeto whicha societyis alreadya nightwatchman
stateis the degreeto whichthe governmentis alreadydoinga goodjob in enforcing
justiceandquashingspoliation.For someoneto rebelagainstspoliativelaws—suchas
Apartheid—by breakingthem,is to strikea blowfor freedom.Conversely,for a Rothbar-
diananarchistto rebelagainsta nightwatchmanstateby settingup his ownvigilante
organization,in the absenceof the nightwatchmanstate’s oversight,is to makea mockery
of freedom.^14
In the Absenceof DueProcess,ThereIs No Long-TermFreedom
As I arguedin BookOne,it is truethat a societycanhavedue processin the longrun in
the absenceof freedom.But,by thatsametoken,a societycannothavefreedomin the
longrun in the absenceof dueprocess.Conjurein yourimaginationa maleprosecutor
whowouldthrowa womanin prison—and exercisethe forceof law againsther without
grantingher anydueprocess.Imaginethe prosecutordoesthis in a contextoutsideof
statesof nationalemergencyor wartime.Thatprosecutoris behavingin a spoliative
manner.Thesameprincipleappliesto privatecitizenswhoare violent.Anygroupof
privatecitizensthatwouldbeatyou up, in the absenceof grantingyou any night-watch-
man-state-mandateddue process,is an oppressivegroup.
To rejecta nightwatchmanstatein favorof the anarchyof competingvigilantegroups
is to say thatpoliceservicesshouldbe cededto competingoppressivemobs.Supposing