Constitution Party of Texas
   
 Return Home
 Party Info
 National Platform
 State Platform
 Latest News
 Support the Party
 Candidates for Office
 Legislative
 Sign our Guestbook
 Join the Discussion
 Campaign Materials
 Local Contact
 Calendar
 Are you a Terrorist?
 Audio Clips
 Free Stuff
 Links
United States
The US Constitution
The Declaration of Independence
Federalist Papers
Anti-Federalist Papers
Other Founding Documents

The State: Evil and Idol



October 29, 2002

For some time now I’ve been advocating the idea of society without the state, or anarchism. This is no more than an affirmation of the principle of the Declaration of Independence: that no man can be justly ruled by another without his consent. To be ruled by force is to be a slave.

So far, I’ve encountered only one serious argument against this principle: that it’s utopian. It can’t work. An utterly free society would be quickly overwhelmed and enslaved or annihilated by a ruthless neighboring society, or by organized criminal elements within. The free society’s freedom would be very brief. The world is ruled by force; always has been, always will be. War is the rule, peace the exception. The idea of anarchism is plausible only to those who naively imagine that peace can be a normal state of affairs.

History offers much to support this pessimistic view. Someone has estimated that mankind has been at war, on the average, for 13 years for every year of peace. And the wars have generally been wars of annihilation, no holds barred. “Civilized” warfare, sparing noncombatants, has been almost exclusively European, existing chiefly in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, when war was sometimes almost a gentlemen’s pastime, rather like fox-hunting.

If you want to survive in this harsh world, the argument runs, you’d better seek the protection of a state, just as, in a tough neighborhood, you may have to join one gang or the other. Anarchism, in this view, is simply not an option. It’s only a dream.

To live, then, is to be the slave of a state, a system of force. The most you can hope for is a reasonably mild state, an Athens rather than a Sparta, whose rule is bearable but whose survival is viable. Of course it’s easy for us to forget that many men are more at home in a Sparta than in an Athens. The taste for freedom, including respect for others’ freedom, is far from universal, or we would all be free.

[Breaker quote: Anarchism and doublethink]This is a powerful argument, and I won’t try to refute it here. But at most it proves only that the state is a necessary evil and that the rule of force is inescapable. Even if we are all doomed to live under the state, it doesn’t follow that there is, or even can be, such a thing as a good state.

Of course some states are worse than others, and the differences matter. Sometimes their subjects can impose limits on them — bills of rights, for example. But since the state is finally a monopoly of force, such limits are always tenuous and unstable. The state’s excuse for being is its protective function, but no state that I know of has ever been confined to this role for long. It soon becomes aggressive, either toward neighboring communities or, more often, against its own subjects.

The remarkable fact is that men are so loyal to the states that rule them. They actually idealize and take pride in their rulers. It may be obvious to outsiders that those rulers are tyrants, but their subjects seldom see it that way. They are often ready, and proud, to fight and die for the men who theoretically protect them! It’s like sacrificing your life to save your bodyguard.

Consider that strange creature, the American conservative. He constantly, and rightly, complains that his government is oppressive. At the same time he insists that his country is the freest on earth. What’s more, he is proud that it’s also the most militarily powerful on earth. Yet he also thinks his freedom is in constant peril from foreign threats, and only the state can preserve it from imminent destruction.

George Orwell gave us the word doublethink for the ability to hold two contradictory views simultaneously. Conservatives have now achieved doublethink and are approaching something like triplethink. They forget that the state is at best a necessary evil, a threat to liberty, and extol their own state as a positive good, even a glorious thing we should take pride in. They quote Lord Acton — “All power tends to corrupt,” et cetera — and celebrate American power. Which is it?

Thus does a “necessary evil” become an idol. Maybe we’re stuck with it. But do we have to worship it?

Joseph Sobran



Joe Sobran's Biography.

Untitled

When honest people who hold strong opinions come together, it is natural that they state their opinions, and that those opinions occasionally clash. The articles that you see on this website represent the opinion of the writers, and are not the official opinion of this party. To see the official party position on any question, the reader is referred to the Party Platform.


Permission to reprint/republish granted, as long as you include the name of our site, the author,and our URL. www.cptexas.org. All CP Texas reports, and all editorials are property of The Constitution Party of Texas 2002 (unless otherwise noted).



Previous Articles by Joe Sobran

Untitled
          Produced by JSager Web Designs