|
Statism and Moral Responsibility Exclusive to STR June 14, 2007 One
of the most horrendous aspects of the government is the degree to which
it dilutes, undercuts and destroys moral responsibility within society.
Old women who would never rob their grandchildren at gunpoint feel
perfectly entitled to cash their Social Security check. Gentle mothers
who would pale at the thought of spanking their children will march self
righteously for "free" daycare. Corporations who would never
imagine assaulting their customers assiduously lobby for legal
benefits--or to escape regulations. Sadly,
the worst effects of the state are not always domestic. Overseas
Imperialism creates generations of guilt-ridden sociopaths who, having
murdered whatever foreigners their commanders pointed at, bring that
moral horror home and spread it through their friends, family and
children. Having been lured to the military with promises of honor and
noble self-defense, they find themselves in positions that are hard to
morally distinguish from your average hit-man, who asks no questions
when pulling the trigger. The
gaping wound at the heart of our culture – Why have we murdered?
– creates a violent antipathy to basic truths that only leads to
further lies. In a recent episode of "60 Minutes," a father
was asked why he and his son enlisted to go to The
connections required to link the tangible benefits of receiving state
monies to the abstract violence that makes it possible are lengthy and
complex. Expecting the average man to understand the violence at the
root of the pleasant kindergarten he drops his child off at is like
expecting the average Christian to understand the translation
difficulties between Aramaic, Greek and the King James Bible. In moral
philosophy, just as in nutrition and medicine, we need experts to make
the causal connections for us. Asking society to learn the truth about
statism from its disastrous effects is like asking people to learn about
the dangers of smoking by getting lung cancer. Experts need to isolate
the variables and make the causal connections clear. In
the absence of expertise, human nature works against the truth.
Achieving and maintaining good health requires knowledge – only eating
whatever tastes good and exercising when you feel like it inevitably
results in disaster. We respond positively to sugars and fats, which
were rare in the infancy of our species, and prefer inactivity to
activity, as an evolutionary means of preserving energy. Short-term
gratifications – when pursued exclusively – lead to disaster. We
cannot be expected to know this in advance, which is the only time it
will do us any good. Thus we need experts to show us negative
consequences before we experience them. It
is exactly the same with the state. The pursuit of short-term
gratification inevitably leads to disaster. As experts in philosophy,
politics and economics, we must fight against the tendency of people to
pursue short-term interests by pointing out the long-term consequences
of their actions. In many ways, ethical instruction is as simple as:
"eat candy, get cavities." This
means that we must show people that we as philosophers practice
what we preach – that we are willing to abjure short-term comfort for
the sake of long-term gains. As moralists, we must display the very
behavior we wish to inculcate. This means repeatedly pointing out
uncomfortable truths to people, despite the inevitable and negative
consequences. Some such difficult truths are: ·
Going
to ·
·
Muslims
do not "hate ·
The
·
Like
the institution of slavery, the state is an agency of violence, evil to
the core. It cannot be reformed, but must be abolished. ·
Almost
everything you were told about society in public schools is propaganda,
directly detrimental to your own self-interest. ·
Policemen
are not primarily there to protect you, but to threaten you if you do
not pay your taxes. ·
Our
existing system is utterly unsustainable, and will collapse within 10 to
15 years at the outside. These
are all bitter pills for most people to swallow, of course – but there
is an even worse one, which overarches all of these issues, which is: ·
There
is nothing accidental about the fact that you were – and are – told
all these lies. It
is very hard for the average citizen to realize that, in his
relationship with his government, he is little more than a cash cow for
taxation, a breeding animal for future taxpayers, and cannon fodder for
war. People point to minor successes in the fight against the
government, such as specific relaxations of regulations, slight tax cuts
and so on – but that is all pure nonsense! A farmer who finds that his
cows are dying because they don't have enough room to move will
certainly increase the size of their cage – but that is so he can
continue to exploit them, not because he dreams of setting them free!
The low birthrate of many Western countries—the inevitable result of
the fact that mammals do not breed well in captivity – is currently
prompting the return of some money to taxpayers in the form of breeding
incentives, but that is scarcely a victory against the government! Naturally,
it is very hard to get the average citizen to understand the danger he
faces at the hands of his government. Doctors face the same issue when
trying to get their patients to drop unhealthy habits. Too many people
only listen to their doctors after they have had a heart attack
– and only because their doctor predicted that heart attack.
This is an essential aspect of what we are up to as libertarians. We
must openly and repeatedly tell people that the system will
self-destruct, that it is evil and rotten to the core, that the army and
police are not noble, that currency is an illusion, debt is real and the
countdown is almost at zero. There is no possibility that we can prevent
the coming crash – it's far too late for that – but because we can accurately
predict it, we are more likely to have credibility after the fact. This
is the paradox of the current system. The government – and the
citizens they rule – are nothing but individuals, but individual
ethics don't really matter when the cultural belief systems as a whole
are corrupt and false. Morality is a form of science, and requires
knowledge, logic and empirical testing to validate. Currently, people
have no idea what is good for them, any more than a caveman knew about
the heliocentric solar system. In the absence of rational philosophy,
the hedonism of the moment is the only possible "guide." If
you know nothing of cavities, weight gain and diabetes, what is to stop
you from eating candy? If you know nothing of the elemental evils of the
state, what is to stop you from grabbing whatever you can whenever you
can? And really, who can blame you for trying? If you don't pick up that
hundred dollar bill lying on the sidewalk, it's not going to stay there
forever. This
is where I find sympathy for my fellow citizens. I happen to love
philosophy – particularly ethics – but that is my particular
fetish. I cannot expect everyone else to be as fascinated by the
subject—and that is entirely as it should be! I study philosophy, you
study medicine. You cannot philosophize, I cannot prescribe – neither
of us can be condemned for our respective lack of knowledge, since every
choice involves an infinity of opportunity costs. But
I do expect you, as my surgeon, to tell me the truth, no matter how
unpleasant it might be for me. And
we, as philosophers, must tell the truth to our world, no matter how
unpleasant it is for others. A doctor who lies, who covers the truth to
provide false comfort—for his own comfort really—is worse than no
doctor at all. If you pick up a scalpel, you must be prepared to cut. Stefan Molyneux maintains a blog, and is the host of Freedomain Radio. Listen to his podcasts, which you can get by clicking here – or, you like iTunes better, you can click here. |