This is a tough book to read. An argument for anarchy is an argument against statism, including democracy and the whole range of government run and sponsored organizations that are and have been a part of our lives basically forever. It would be easy to dismiss anarchy as completely unfeasible, the realm of angst ridden, anti-authority teenagers most often seen protesting in black outside of international meetings. In reality, the case for anarchy is much more complex. It is founded on principles of non-violence and non-coercion. This doesn't mean extreme pacifism; self-defense is appropriate, but initiating violence is immoral.Once you've accepted that the initiation of violence is immoral, Molyneaux argues convincingly that the state can't exist without initiating violence. He then argues that a society without a state and the violence inherent in statism is possible and desirable. Not all of my concern were, or could possibly be, handled in one book. I felt that there were several statements that Molyneaux took as axiomatic that I could argue with. Even so, it's a short book and it presents its case well. One complaint I have with it is that some of his arguments unnecessarily attacked religion. This seemed to detract from their effectiveness by introducing a controversial subject into an a topic that is plenty controversial on its own. Anarchism doesn't always equal atheism.Everyday Anarchy isn't angry, empty rhetoric. It isn't alternate-reality thinking ("if the world and human nature were different it might work") and it isn't the ramblings of an extremist. It's a well thought out, compelling argument that is worth the consideration of anyone interested in society and the way it is organized.