Chodorov’s thought is not pious at all,nbut rather tinnily rationalistic when hendefines the state as “a number of personsnwho are up to no good.” If onenlooks at the state in this light, one isnjustified in seeing the solution of ourncurrent difficulties in its abolition.nIhe Libertarian Party program ofn1980 embraces just such an anarchistnprescription. For example, where Chodorovncomposes a paean to the taxevadernas a model for us all, the LibertariannParty seeks the immediatenelimination of “all criminal and civilnsanctions against tax evasion.” If thenpeople withhold the material means ofnsupport for the governmental bureaucracynby refusing to pay taxes and directnit through the “whip of public opinion,”nas Chodorov advocated, the state maynsomeday be reduced to a government.nIf such notions seem a trifle farfetched,nwe should recall Chodorov’snabsblute opposition to military conscriptionnas a violation of individual liberties,nelaborated in great detail in then1980 Libertarian platform, which hasnfor some time now been the officialnpolicy of the United States. The practicalnresult of this libertarian aberrationnin public policy has been the virtualncollapse of our armed forces.nChodorov and the libertarians wouldnconsider that a desirable outcome, butnmainstream conservatives and liberalsnwould not. For if conservatives cannforge alliances with libertarians onnmany economic issues, they are totallynat odds in the foreign-policy arena, especiallynin their assessment of the challengenwe face from the internationalncommunist movement.nChodorov’s antistatist convictions reinforcednhis natural attraction to pacifism:n”peace and politics are antithetical,”nhe wrote in an article opposing thenUnited Nations. Much like Henry Kissinger,narchitect of the calamitousnSoviet-American detente of the 1970’s,nChodorov believed that free trade isnthe key to peace, combining politicalnisolationism (the “natural attitude ofn’MnChronicles of Culturena people,” he called it) with economicninternationalism. Trade, he wrote innone encomium to it, is the “harbingernof goodwill among men, and peace onnearth.” And again he said, “the onlynway to a world society is through freentrade. … if the customer is alwaysnright, how could he be an enemy.”” Butnby 1981 we have experience of the waysna trading partner may employ trade asna weapon, and we realize that Chodorovnoversimplified reality.nAs a libertarian Chodorov viewedncommunism either as unimportant ornas something not so very different fromnthe state system under which he himselfnlived. For instance, at the height of thenCold War in 1949, he remarked thatncommunism as a philosophy was rarelyntaught in American schools because liberalncapitalism had adopted many of itsnbasic precepts and did not wish this tonbe widely recognized. The chief differencenbetween communist and capitalistnstates “seems to lie in the extent andnincidence of fraud,” he argued. “That’snall.” When he analyzed communismnmore carefully, Chodorov maintainedneither that it was rooted in povertynand so could be cured through thenmaterial prosperity engendered by a freeneconomy, or that it was a nexus of ideasnwhich could be refuted only in the realmnof ideas. Consequently he opposed anynrestrictions on the communists in thendissemination of their ideas but also—nand rather surprisingly—advocated then^rnnnrelentless use of governmental forcento suppress overt communist violencenas a means to political power and denouncednindustrial strikes as “miniaturenwar.”nAlthough in theory Chodorov heldnthat the government should have sufficientnmilitary strength to repel foreignninvasion, he opposed foreign interventionnvigorously. He praised conscientiousnobjectors of both the First andnSecond World Wars, and in 1947, whilendenouncing the slogan “Stop communism!”nas a mere mask for Western imperialism,nhe formulated his pacifistnconvictions quite clearly:nAbove all, when the time comes, wenwill refuse to fight, choosing the selfrespectnof the prison camp to the ignominynof the battlefield. It is farnnobler to clean a latrine than to killna man for profit.nOne may detect here a latent anti-nAmericanism, a sentiment which helpsnto explain the otherwise puzzling hbertariahnindifference toward communistnexpansion. “We are told that we mustnfear the Russians,” Chodorov wrote inn1954. “I am more afraid of those who,nlike their forebears, would compel usnagainst our will to fight the Russians.”nAnd that was because, he professed tonbelieve, an anticommunist mobilizationnwould eventually lead to a totalitariannsystem at home in no way preferable tonthe communist system abroad.n(chodorov’s pacifist, anti-anticommunistnand anti-interventionist ideasnrun through the 1980 Libertarian Partynplatform, which at one point speaksnapprovingly of “resistance to such transgressionsnas imperiahstic wars and aggressivenacts of the [American] military.”nAt another point it declares thatnits foreign-policy positions are basednupon “the principle of non-intervention.”nThe application of this principlenleads the Libertarian Party to call for annend to the American involvement withnthe United Nations, to advocate the ter-n