Thoughts on freedom, programming and other type stuffs.

Tyranny Sincerely Exercised

Resistance is futile.In a single excerpt from a single essay, I’m pretty sure I can recap the several years of deep reflection that took me from conservative Republican to anarcho-capitalist libertarian.

If society can mend, remake, and unmake men at its pleasure, its pleasure may, of course, be humane or homicidal. The difference is important. But, either way, rulers have become owners. Observe how the ‘humane’ attitude to crime could operate. If crimes are diseases, why should diseases be treated differently from crimes? And who but the experts can define disease? One school of psychology regards my religion as a neurosis. If this neurosis ever becomes inconvenient to Government, what is to prevent my being subjected to a compulsory ‘cure’? It may be painful; treatments sometimes are. But it will be no use asking, ‘What have I done to deserve this?’ The Straightener will reply: ‘But, my dear fellow, no one’s blaming you. We no longer believe in retributive justice. We’re healing you.’

This would be no more than an extreme application of the political philosophy implicit in most modern communities. It has stolen on us unawares. Two wars necessitated vast curtailments of liberty, and we have grown, though grumblingly, accustomed to our chains. The increasing complexity and precariousness of our economic life have forced Government to take over many spheres of activity once left to choice or chance. Our intellectuals have surrendered first to the slave-philosophy of Hegel, then to Marx, finally to the linguistic analysts.

As a result, classical political theory, with its Stoical, Christian, and juristic key-conceptions (natural law, the value of the individual, the rights of man), has died. The modern State exists not to protect our rights but to do us good or make us good — anyway, to do something to us or to make us something. Hence the new name ‘leaders’ for those who were once ‘rulers’. We are less their subjects than their wards, pupils, or domestic animals. There is nothing left of which we can say to them, ‘Mind your own business.’ Our whole lives are their business.

C. S. Lewis
Willing Slaves of the Welfare State

(Whole essay, very much worth reading, is here.)

My conversion went like this:

  • I’m fighting for the government to control how people act.
  • The people I support won’t always be in control.
  • If the government has the power to control how people act and I don’t agree with the people in charge, I’m at risk to have myself and my behavior controlled in exactly the same way I’m advocating.
  • The only way to avoid tyranny is to take away the power to control behavior from the state.

In other words, I’m not a libertarian because I hope for libertine squalor or because I hope to hasten the moral decay of society (whatever that means). I’m a libertarian (and border on anarcho-capitalist) because I dread tyranny.

And lest there be any misunderstanding, just because you agree with the outcome doesn’t make your particular brand of government-run behavioral control any less tyrannical:

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C. S. Lewis
God in the Dock

Listen, people: you can’t pass laws that make people better or fix society’s ills. All you can do is make everyone less free in the process. Make no mistake: government-run healthcare is a tyranny no less sincerely executed for the good of its victim than the moral do-gooding of the religious right. In the end, we’re left only with less freedom and heavier chains.

I wish I could shout this from the rooftops.

In Which I Ease Back Into Posting By Breaking Out Rothbard and Discussing Free Will

Free Will(y)

Myth #5: Libertarians are utopians who believe that all people are good, and that therefore State control is not necessary. Conservatives tend to add that since human nature is either partially or wholly evil, strong State regulation is therefore necessary for society.

Rothbard’s Six Myths About Libertarianism.

I don’t know if everyone’s path towards libertarianism comes to the the fork in the road called free will, but mine certainly did.

Free will, for all intents and purposes, is a terrifying thing, and I suppose that’s why we ask the State to take it away from other people.  Free will means other people don’t always behave the way you want, it means they can do things which you consider morally reprehensible.  Enter the State: if my neighbor won’t make choices that I see as good for him, I can make the State mandate those choices for him.  One way or another, I can make my fellow man live rightly.

But somewhere along the way, I came to the epiphanic conclusion that asking the State not to play moral arbiter is not the same as complicity.  More than that, State-mandated morality doesn’t remove from us the weighty responsibility attached to having free will.  It does, however, hand back to the State bit by bit the freedom we wrested from it.

What really got to me in the end, though, was the power we were handing the government.  ”Control their lives,” may have been the goal, but implicit in that was “and not ours, please.”

As Rothbard puts it:

The State is the only social institution which is able to extract its income and wealth by coercion; all others must obtain revenue either by selling a product or service to customers or by receiving voluntary gifts. And the State is the only institution which can use the revenue from this organized theft to presume to control and regulate people’s lives and property. Hence, the institution of the State establishes a socially legitimatized and sanctified channel for bad people to do bad things, to commit regularized theft and to wield dictatorial power.

Handing the State control to regulate behavior you don’t like is a a disaster-in-waiting; when people you don’t like assume control of the machine you’ve built, the State already has the authority to regulate your life according to the whims of others.

Rothbard goes on to quote Hayek:

“The main merit of individualism [which Adam Smith and his contemporaries advocated] is that it is a system under which bad men can do least harm. It is a social system which does not depend for its functioning on our finding good men for running it, or on all men becoming better than they now are, but which makes use of men in all their given variety and complexity….”

And there it is: once you’ve handed the State the power to regulate lives, you have to hope the “wrong people” never come into power.  Fingers crossed, huh?

On Selfishness

A friend of mine recently quipped on Facebook that opponents of health care reform were selfish, and that such selfishness was the height of irony coming from Christians.

Granted, this was an internet argument. It’s dumb of me to even care, much less address.  But I figure there’s a question behind the question that needs to be answered: are libertarians selfish?

The ethos he is following was Marx’s: from each according to ability and to each according to need.  (Not in some secret socialist way, either…he actually quoted the line directly.)  It’s a core tenant of socialism: everyone contributes, everyone benefits.  And with that as your jumping-off point, I suppose anything else would seem selfish.  When the greater good of society is paramount, what use do we have for any individual liberty?

Which is why I suppose people of this mindset believe their rights are derived from government.  If government is the source of rights, surely it has the ability to take them away in order to benefit society.

And somewhere in here, I think, is what Paine described in Common Sense:

SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil in its worst state an intolerable one…

This friend of mine is no different than the 18th century writer longing for the King’s gentle guidance.  He wants the fatherly hand of government to wipe away society’s ills, to remove all needs, to fix all problems.

But we don’t live in that world.  We don’t live in a world where rights are granted by the government, but where government itself is created by the people for the people.  Our rights on Earth are inherent and inalienable, endowed by our Creator.  Government exists not to give us rights — we have them by default.

That expansive liberty comes with pitfalls, for sure.  It comes with the ability to fail, to lose everything and suffer the consequences of poor choices.  But it also comes with the freedom to succeed, to follow dreams and acquire the things and relationships that can make us content – to pursue happiness.  When we remove rights, when we invite government to dole out rights, to take away consequences, to distribute wealth with more equality, we destroy the ability to pursue what makes us happy.  What is more selfish than to make life not worth living?

To the original question — are libertarians selfish? — my answer is no, not in this world.  We are selfish in a world only where government is the source of rights, only in a world where freedom is granted and not endowed, only in a world without the ability to succeed.

I don’t root for failure, I don’t care to see people suffer; but these are my burdens, not society’s.  And in a world where I have the freedom to succeed or fail, I also have the ability to take care of a downtrodden friend.

That’s the power of individual liberty: my life is mine to lead, in whatever manner I think best.  Taking that God-given right away from people is true, fully-embodied selfishness.

One of those William Chase Johnson blogs.