Lesson 6: Individual Rights and the State
Opposite views : statism and anarchism
In the first lesson, I have explained that politics is derived from ethics by way of values. That is to say : one's ethical premises determine what one considers as the optimal situation, which determine what one will consider as the optimal political system.
In the case of Objectivist politics :
* Using egoism as a premise (which is based on reason),
* We propose that the optimal situation is one where "everyone is free to pursue his own survival and flourishing - where no one must be sacrificed for another",
* And this entails that the best political system is a government which is dedicated to the protection of individual rights.
As we have seen in lesson 4, the three main forms of epistemology entail three different views on ethics. While the mystic and the epistemic skeptic both accept the premises of altruism, they do so in different ways. The former preaches negative values, and the latter refuses all values.
But since ethics implies politics, these views also have their own political consequences.
* Using the premise of mysticism,
* We propose that the optimal situation is one where the good of a construct higher than the individual (be it God, the state, or any other abstraction) must be pursued, and sacrifice imposed in order to pursue that good,
* And this entails that the best political system is a powerful government dedicated to directing society according to this greater good (collectivism, statism).
* Using the premise of epistemic skepticism,
* We propose that there is no optimal situation - that each person should be free to impose his own,
* And this entails that the best political system is an informal power structure, where "might makes right" (anarchy).
Statism is a class of political systems where power (be it economical or social) is concentrated in the hands of the state. Anarchy is a class of political systems where there is no formal political power, leaving might determine the leaders of the society.
While they seem very different (just as in ethics, religious morality and nihilism also look very different), both represent the triumph of force over reason.
Statists believe that the government is entitled to use force against individuals in order to implement a common good. Anarchists believe that individuals are entitled to use force against other individuals in order to enforce their own ideals.
Objectivism rejects both views and upholds that freedom, not force, must be the norm in human relations.
This distinction, to a lesser extent, is also present in modern politics, in the form of the "right/left" axis. The standard political model of right and left is illustrated below.
The "Left" is associated with what we call liberalism, and its extreme is communism. The "Right" is associated with what we call conservatism, and its extreme is fascism. From what we have seen about Objectivist politics, can you see the problem with such a division ?
The problem is that it sets up two different kinds of statism as the only alternatives. Objectivist politics does not recognize a dichotomy between different kinds of statism, or even different kinds of force.
It only recognizes the basic dichotomy of politics as being : do you choose freedom or statism ?
It is obvious what the fraudulent issue of fascism versus communism accomplishes; it sets up as opposites, two variants of the same political system; it eliminates the possibility of considering capitalism; it switches the choice of "Freedom or dictatorship ?" into "Which kind of dictatorship ?" - thus establishing dictatorship as an inevitable fact and offering only a choice of rulers. The choice - according to the proponents of that fraud - is : a dictatorship of the rich (fascism) or a dictatorship of the poor (communism).
This is represented by the Nolan Chart. The Nolan Chart is an alternative to the right/left dichotomy, which uses two axes instead of one. Here is how it is typically represented :
The Objectivist answer is that the only rational position is freedom. This position is called capitalism by most Objectivists, but I personally find that this is usually erroneously associated with the "right" (which is corporatist, not capitalist). A more precise word would be libertarianism.
In the next section, we will see what it entails in more detail.
