Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Libertarianism vs illegitimate State

The State is not legitimate, since it initiates force on its citizens.

The idea of a social contract is bogus, since you cannot opt out (without fleeing your country, mind you). If a special form of contract exists between individual and state, then a similar contract exists between rapist and victim, kidnapper and kidnappee, enslaver and slave etc. The State is just one violent actor among others.

Democracy does not make the State legitimate. The consent and approval of the majority of humans within an arbitrarily defined geographic region does not turn immoral actions into moral actions.

Democracy is, in fact, just a weak patch on the social contract. Democracy allows you to change this or that clause of the contract. The problem, however, is that the social contract in itself is illegitimate.

The only social contract that exists in the world is that between individuals. To respect this contract, one need only refrain from initiating violence and force against others. To respect the State's social contract, one must accept being the subject of violence and force.

The only way to make the State legitimate, is to allow citizens to secede.

The Minarchist State, however, is legimate, since it does not initiate force, relying instead on voluntary donations for funding. It only serves as a robot, protecting the natural rights of its citizens.

Your thoughts?


RatePoint Business Reviews