Do you advocate violence?

Think of an idea for improving the world. Now ask yourself, would you be willing to execute this idea by going door-to-door pointing a gun at your neighbors?

Well . . .

That's exactly what you do whenever you ask politicians to take action. Only you don't use the gun yourself. Policeman, regulators, and tax collectors do it for you.

The fact that other people hold the gun allows you to ignore the fact that you are using the threat of violence to accomplish your goals.

If this assessment seems too harsh, that may be because the gun and the violence are so well hidden from you. Not only are other people carrying the gun for you, but usually . . .

  • People avoid the violence by submitting to The State's dictates before the gun is drawn
  • And whenever a policeman, regulator, or tax collector does use a gun on a citizen, you aren't there to see it

This makes things quite cozy for you. You can dwell on the good things you want to do for people, and ignore the violence inherent in the means you have chosen. But the gun is there, the gun is real, and you are responsible for it.

I suggest that you need to challenge yourself about the violence inherent in all attempts to use The State to re-engineer society.

  • If your idea for improving the world is really so good, then why are threats of violence required?
  • Why is The State required?
  • Why isn't persuasion sufficient?

Please notice that Statist thinking involves a huge element of hypocrisy. If someone else thinks they have a great idea for improving the world, but you reject that idea, you rightly feel oppressed if The State then imposes that idea on you against your will. But other people feel the same way about the ideas you want to impose on them.

What makes you so special, that you should be allowed to use violence against others, but you don't want them to use violence against you?

Stop advocating violence. Reject Statism.