I am now a Voluntaryist
It’s three months since my last blog post, and quite a few things have happened since then. There’s been Christmas, New Year, my January exams; I’ve learnt to solve a Rubick’s cube, started playing the piano a bit more often, had a conditional offer from Cambridge University. I’ve also updated this blog to Wordpress 2.7, so sorry for any breakages. Unfortunately, something that hasn’t happened is further progress on AGPLMail and Libreapps. I’m sorry, both those projects have died a slow death – I hope to resurrect them both in the future, but I make no guarantees.
However, for me personally, the biggest thing that happened is none of the above. It’s something I first started thinking about nearly a year ago, asking myself what freedom really was. Interestingly, looking back, I have blogged much about the transition to where I am now. And where is that?, I hear you ask. I am now a voluntaryist.
As a voluntaryist, I believe that every human being owns their own life, and thus their liberty and property. This is the idea of self ownership. All interactions should be voluntary, so initiating force against someone is morally wrong – the non-aggression principle. (Defensive force is a completely acceptable and unfortunately necessary way to deal with those who decide to initiate force against you). And, I believe that this principle of non-aggression applies not just to individuals but also to the government – because, all I see government now is just a bunch of individuals claiming the authority and knowledge to tell other people what to do, and I believe that their claims are false.
I used to accept government as a necessary evil, but now I realise that it is an unnecessary one. People are perfectly capable of organising and defending themselves without the force of government there. The system by which this would happen is one of anarcho-capitalism or market anarchy – The Market for Liberty did a great job of helping me understand how this would work. Not only would such a sytem be as good as a governmental one, in most places it would be far superior, because people are generally better at making decisions about there own lives than the countless bureaucrats in Washington or Whitehall, who have no idea about the individual complexities of every individual’s situation.
So, even once I had come to the conclusion that society could function perfectly well without government, there was still something bothering me. You see, for small government conservatives, proof that government is unnecessary for an orderly society is enough to make them voluntaryists. But, I wasn’t conservative, I’ve always to dislike political classifications (although not as much as I do now), but, on the left to right scale, I knew I was certainly somewhere on the left. I care about people and nature, I don’t want the poor exploited or abandoned, and the same applies to a lesser extent to the environment. I’ve never been a communist, but surely slightly socialist governments that make sure the poor are treated acceptably and are given a chance are a good thing, right?
Wrong. Firstly, although some people in government are genuinely trying to help the poor, there are also many people in government who do not care, and the many rules and regulations that the government create often end up stifling the opportunities for the poor. One example of this would be the fact that Churches in some places have been told they can not allow poor people to sleep in their buildings because this contravenes zoning regulations. Doesn’t sound helpful to me.
Nonetheless, I still believe that people should be compassionate and help those in need. Not only does government squash others attempts at this, when it does it itself it does it in the most inefficient and uncompassionate way possible. Money is taken from people by force (taxes) and then goes through government programs, who have to employ bureaucrats, leading to only a percentage going to those actually in need. In a voluntary society, people would give money to organisations that they support, so this kind of wastefulness with funds would not be accepted.
The idea that you don’t need government for kindness and generosity to flourish, and in fact quite the opposite, was brought to me best by The Law, an old french book by Frédéric Bastiat – “Every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.” Another point of this book is that government can not possible act for the good of everyone, it will be biased by those with friends of political power, by the most vocal pressure groups. This kind of twisting of where government force aimed is a great waste of people’s time and money, and ultimately does not favour the poor, since they don’t have time or money to spare. In the words of Bastiat – “legislation will then be — in fact, it already is — the battlefield for the fantasies and greed of everyone.” We all try and get government to help ourselves, and in the end life is made worse for everyone.
So, to sum up, I new thoroughly believe that coercion (initiated force), and is no more justifiable when it is done by “the government” than ordinary people. I value compassion – helping the poor and looking after the environment. The best and most effective way to do these things is in a world without the artificial interference of those who call themselves the government.