Monday, September 25, 2006

Cause and Effect

The philosophical debate continues. This time, another State Worshipper I know wants to argue that the violence employed by the State is completely separate from its demands to, say, pay your taxes. In this assertion, it is clear that Statists have a fundamental misunderstanding (or willful denial) of "cause" and "effect".

For example, lets say the State wants you to give it one-half of your paycheck. My assertion is that the reality of this demand is that you must deliver up half your income, or else you will be the target of a violent assault at the hands of the government’s goon squad (we'll call them "IRS agents"). Somewhere in the mix is the implicit fact that should you not give in to the State’s demands, baaaaad things will happen.

The Statist argument? Well...they aren’t shooting you for income tax evasion, they are shooting you for resisting arrest. That, somehow, changes everything. Of course, the fact that the reason you are resisting arrest directly descends from the initial demand, "give me half your income", is completely ignored. They refuse to acknowledge the arrest is simply a method the State is using to enforce its demand - for half your income - and therefore, the violence employed in the arrest is all part of the attempt to obtain half your income.

In this sense, the violence behind the demand for tax payment is obscured. The immoral, evil nature of State action is thus masked, and the view that the State is nothing but a benevolent caregiver can be promulgated.

To help illustrate this principle, just ask yourself how this would work in the private sector. Who else gets what they want from you by threatening you? If a private company, say Wal Mart, sent you a letter saying it wanted you to fork over half of your money, and you ignored the request, nothing would happen to you. If Wal Mart decided to send its goon squad to apprehend you, and you fought them back, we call this self-defense, and we give our moral blessings to those who defend themselves against attackers.

However, Statists place people employed by the State in a separate moral universe. Putting on a badge is the equivalent of a baptism. The State makes its demands and if you don’t submit, sooner or later, the guns will be pulled out...and that is morally justifiable, per se....because the State is exempt from objective morality.

I’m sorry, my State Loving friends. Government is violence. The fact that we don’t go from A to Z in one step, doesn’t negate the fact that eventually, it will come around to the firing of bullets. Deny it all you wish, but objective reality is not on your side.


Blogger doinkicarus said...

Ludwig von Mises: "No physical violence and compulsion can possibly force a man against his will to remain in the status of the ward of a hegemonic order. What violence or the threat of violence brings about is a state of affairs in which subjection as a rule is considered more desirable than rebellion. Faced with the choice between the consequences of obedience and of disobedience, the ward prefers the former and thus integrates himself into the hegemonic bond. Every new command places this choice before him again. In yielding again and again he himself contributes his share to the continuous existence of the hegemonic societal body." - Human Action

10:30 PM  
Anonymous Libertarian Jason said...

Great quote! I've got HA on my shelf.... I haven't been brave enough to attempt reading it...especially as I'm in the middle of Rothbard's "Man, Economy, and State".

7:12 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home