1-19-2011 (RM, France)
Many people in France are interested in discussing personal politics, but up until this point I was pretty hesitant to enter into that type of discussion fearing that my ideas are far too complex to summarize in a short discussion session. Specifically I have been asked on numerous occasions if I voted for Obama and who I plan to vote for in the next election cycle. I have pretty much kept it at that I don't vote. When asked why I simply state that I don't support the State in its modern incarnation. This has confused some so I will try to take a moment to explain.
The State, by its very definition, has a monopoly on physical violence and force. In a legitimate society, one based on private property and voluntary human interaction, the State is the mechanism of retaliation against those who would deprive the rights of other individuals. Notice that, for me, the use of force by the State may only be initiated AFTER an illegitimate use of force by someone else. Simply put, I am against the initiation of force by the State in a preemptive way.
Building upon the premise of the legitimate role of the State, it may become more clear as to why I can't lend my support to the current incarnation of the US government. This incarnation is not specific to the current regime, but spans across political parties and individual politicians. In other words, the majority of State action taken today begins with the initiation of force against peaceful, private individual citizens. I can not lend my support for such a system of political rule, so I choose generally not to vote. Were I to vote, I can guarantee it would be against incumbent politicians despite their political party affiliation. Better to prevent politicians from making a career out of looting the private wealth of individuals as lifelong members of the ruling political body.
Does this make me an anarchist? No, not really. I do support a minimal government; one that functions as the protector of individual rights and property. Decentralization of power is key for me, especially in terms of the State's ability to wage mass-murder in the form of foreign wars. I also believe that the State should not interfere in the decisions of individual actors so long as they are not causing harm to another human being or their property. This holds true across all issues including a person's economic livelihood and the ability to own, control, transfer, use, and enjoy property.
I will tell you that I do not consider democracy or voting as sacrosanct, because these are simply institutional means to an even greater end: individual human liberty and voluntary interaction. What I mean is that the democratic system of government is not in place for the sake of itself, but for the sake of protecting individuals against unreasonable uses of force against them. When democracy turns against the goal of human liberty, then it is no longer a system worthy of support. Does this mean that our society can't turn back to a legitimate system of political rule? I can't really speculate. This would take a massive political and philosophical changing of the tide in terms of the way the public thinks about the role of the State.
For now, trust me when I say that I put faith in decentralized human creativity and creation. I believe that free minds, when free to create, exchange, and expound upon ideas, will help drive technological, social, and economic changes that will improve the lives of people around the world. Invisible lines on a map don't limit the emergence of cooperation, friendship, and bonds that can develop between people across the world.
Regards,
Chris
song of the day: Death and the Healing by Wintersun
No comments:
Post a Comment