I recently came across this apparently new group.
Ethical Principles of the International Panarchist Federation (IPF):
1. IPF rejects coercive proposals which advocate a single specific political and economic system to the exclusion of all others in a given territory. Instead, IPF proposes a new international order founded on the principles of mutual tolerance and absolute self-determination. This new international order is called Panarchy and it’s based on Natural Law (universal negative rights of life, liberty and property, and positive rights derived only from consensual social organization).
2. All individuals possess the right to renounce their own citizenship, including the taxes they’re asked to pay and the (positive) laws they’re told to follow, while maintaining the right to migrate, settle, and work everywhere. Their unique status as extraterritorial should be recognized as such under international law.
3. Individuals possess the right to freely associate and create social organizations to protect the interests of their members. It is not necessary that these social organizations are defined by any territorial boundary.
4. IPF does not seek to abolish government for those that voluntarily consent to it. Governments that are presently involuntary must either become voluntary and non-territorial, or be abolished.
5. There are many systems of government IPF is opposed to in principle, even when voluntary, like systems explicitly bigoted, or motivated by hate and prejudice of race, class, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc. IPF tolerates them not because they are good, but because the forceful correction of such systems is only possible by an even greater violation of rights.
6. IPF envisions the possibility of different competing property systems, like proudhonian possession property, bakuninian collective property of the MoP, kropotkinian common property, and lockean sticky property aka private property limited by the lockean proviso and self-ownership proviso. Economic systems that are presently involuntary must either become voluntary, or be abolished.
7. Power must not be seized for the purpose of emancipation from the top down, by either electoral or vanguardist methods. Every single step towards liberation must in itself be emancipatory in its character or else the risk of creating or maintaining a permanent authoritarian system is greater than the benefit.
8. On the other hand, IPF does not reject from its membership those who are members of a political party. Participation in involuntary electoral systems may be situationally useful without endorsement of the system itself. A good example would be running an educational campaign in support of voluntary government.