So what is it With Liberty?
by Tibor R. Machan
Las Vegas, Nevada. At the annual meeting of the Association of Private Enterprise Education this year, there were about 200 participants and several dozens of meetings, come concurrent, some plenary, but the main question that kept coming up everywhere was roughly the same: Why is it so difficult to get people to realize that individual liberty is all around far better than government regimentation; why do people, even after all the historical, analytical, moral, and related arguments have shown that human community life benefits from liberty a great deal more than from all the varieties of government intervention, keep putting their faith in force, not in voluntary cooperation and competition?
No one seriously doubts, at least in America, that religion is in better hands when decoupled from government than when the state tried to force it down people's throats. There is little question that a free press is superior to a managed one. So, then, why is there this persistence of trust in the idea that as far as commerce, education, science, medicine and other areas are concerned, we need government to take the initiative instead of just keeping watch that criminals don't get away with impunity, that violence is kept out of the process?
Speaker after speaker trotted out evidence upon evidence showing that environmental, educational, artistic and all kinds of other issues are better handled when government stays out of the picture, yet speaker after speaker ended presentation followed by presentation with the question: How is it that this plain fact isn't accepted by the public, by politicians and by academics?
Sure, there are some who have a vested interest in holding on to the myth that the state is necessary to make things work, but the rationalizations of such folks are transparent enough for most people to grasp. It is not these people whose lack of appreciation for the value of human liberty is mystifying. No, it is those who themselves would benefit most from liberty who seem not to grasp its immense advantage over the use of coercive force. And that is bizarre.
We have the examples of the Soviet Union, of Nazi Germany, of Fascist Italy, of Cuba, North Korea, Iraq, Iran and even of the faltering welfare states around the globe to teach the lesson that men and women who aren't treated as children by a government that is supposed to stick to protecting their basic rights do far better at solving problems, at doing the right thing, at being creative and productive, than are the subjects of more or less dictatorial regimes. Yet the lessons do not take. So, what's up anyway - are the majority of human beings simply too dense to get it? Are they sadist and/or masochists who just will not let go off the horrors and inefficiencies of corrupt government work?
Amidst the various hypotheses advanced to make sense of the apparent stupidity of millions of even very smart people one collage of reasons stood out for me as having a very good chance at explaining the lack of full success of the message that liberty trumps it all. The gist has to do with the fact that liberty is, after all, a risky state to be in.
First, liberty involves taking responsibility for one's conduct, good or bad. Second, it means not treating your fellows as if they were available for you to use to your heart's content, whenever your luck has run out. Then, also, there is the risk that free men and women will just do their own thing, good or bad, and not pay much heed to what the wiser folk would have them do, or that it will take quite a bit of effort to get them to do what the wiser folk want if government's force of arms aren't available to set them right. Finally, and I put a lot of credence in this one: free men and women do not have to serve some mysterious lord and master no one really understands very well but lots of folks like to speak for.
Nearly all religions fear that without a good deal of force or its threat, we will just concentrate on living a happy life, never mind the saving of our immortal souls. You cannot take it with you, as everyone knows, so if we are not kept in check by those claiming to be wiser than we are, we will just live it up right here and now, never mind everlasting salvation.
And that is to some a frightening prospect.
So, few people are comfortable giving up the hope that they can eventually turn the powers of government to their own superior use and make people virtuous, get them to behave properly.
Of course, there is nothing whatsoever decent about people doing the right thing because they are made to do it. Still, this just doesn't seem to faze either Muslims or many Christians - so we have wars on drugs, vice squads and forced prayers and the like. And, of course, we have government regulation of commerce.
Perhaps only after it is grasped, finally, that all we can do in life is learn to live right, that whatever follows, if anything, thereafter is completely out of our hands, will we also admit that freedom is better for people than any measure of tyranny, be it Draconian or petty. Given how this idea is quite radical and relatively new, it may be, as Ayn Rand once wrote, earlier than you think.
Discuss this Article (5 messages)
|
