The State is VIOLENCE

Many people are ignorant about the nature of government (which for our purposes here we will refer to as “The State”). So the following will explore what the state is in practical terms.

What is the state?

For all the pomp and circumstance state is simply the institution that makes the rules for a society (which we call laws or legislation). In history, sometimes this was just one guy, a dictator or king, but in the US we have a complex federalist republic where the people select legislatures who make the rules, the executive agencies enforce those rules and then courts settle disputes over those rules.

But many institutions make rules. So what distinguishes the state from any other institution with rules? Simple: The state is the only social institution that has the legal right to enforce its rules through the initiation of violence or the threat of it. Thus a monopoly on the legal initiation of violent force in order to gain compliance is ultimately what differentiates a state from other institutions. The state is defined by violence.

Is violence always a bad?

But is this a bad thing ? Well I guess that depends on who you ask. If a man raped a woman, it’s not likely that man would voluntarily go put himself in a jail cell. So we create a rule that says if you rape someone, you have to go sit in a jail cell for a very long time and if you don’t comply we will send guys with guns, and if you resist them they will use violent force to make you comply with the rules. Nearly everyone thinks that is reasonable. However, you can see how it becomes problematic when you consider that essentially everything the government does follows this same formula of rules backed by guys with guns.

This is not an exaggeration. If you park in the wrong spot and get a $50 ticket and continually refuse to pay it eventually the state will authorize guys with guns to come and put you in a cage against your will unless you comply. Most people just pay the fine to avoid the violence but let’s not forget that the $50 was ultimately backed by a threat of violence. If that was not the case then anyone could just say no I am not paying and that would be the end of it. Also we should keep in mind that if people do something of their own free will , then there is no need for a rule. This is why there is no rule to go pick up your paycheck. In addition, a rule is meaningless unless it ultimately can be enforced and the final and ultimate level of enforcement is physical violence.

But what about public services?

The state is an agent whose very nature (the creation of laws) is to compel behavior by threat of violence for non compliance. Take a moment to reflect on this. Try and think of any example of state rules not ultimately being backed by guys with guns. Even institutions like NASA are forced creations. People could conceivably voluntarily create an institution like NASA but that’s not what NASA is. It is an institution created through the government taking funds and resources under threat of violence, not through voluntary cooperation.

The high stakes of politics.

In its essence the state is a gun. I am going to repeat that. In its essence the state is a gun and politics is the battle for that gun to decide who it will be pointed at and why. This is why politics is such a high stakes game. History is full of bloody horrors of what can happen if the wrong people get control of the gun and point it at whomever they deem to be their enemies. History is largely the tale of the danger of the state and its power.

When I was younger my dad shared with me a quote that is sometimes attributed to George Washington…

The American founders understood the nature of the state and our system of government was designed to make “the gun” of government as small as possible and to ensure it was only pointed at those who were guilty of violating someones natural rights. They understood that the state is inherently antithetical to liberty and thus wanted to limit it.

So ask yourself this the next time a law is being considered? Am I really willing to send people with guns to violently put people in a cage if they don’t comply with this law? Because that is the reality of what legislation is. If you are not willing to send in guys with guns then you are under a rational and moral obligation to fight against such abuses of state power. Never forget, at its heart the state is an instrument of coercion through violence.

Keep that in mind and respond accordingly.