Who really benefits from the idea that people should “love their country” as a fundamental part of their ideolgy or principles? I’d like to understand what it is that causes people to feel that they should love their country. A country is basically defined as a territory within a set of boundaries known as borders in which, a small group of people make up rules that the majority have to live under with threat of violence if they do not comply with the rules. It doesn’t matter if the ruling class was voted in or whether they took control by force. They are the rulers and those who are not part of the ruling class are their subjects whether or not they know it or believe it. I believe that rulers throughout history have purported the Love of Country meme first and foremost for their own benefit.
[“God grant that not only the love of liberty but a thorough knowledge of the rights of man may pervade all the nations of the earth, so that anybody may set his foot anywhere on its surface and say: ‘This is my country!” Benjamin Franklin]
(You see, it’s not about a territory, it’s about liberty and freedom)
Even if a majority votes to allow a person or persons to rule them they are in no sense free. A more appropriate name for democracies would be “gang rule” since 51% of the people are forcing the other 50% to live under the totalitarian government of their choosing. I know Americans especially love to shout to the rest of the world that they live in the “freest country in the world!” but is it true just because they say it or because they believe it? Just because they get to vote for their Overlords in no sense makes them free. If anyone in America believes they are free I would challenge them to simply and freely choose to stop letting the government steel their money; just stop paying taxes and then they’ll learn quite quickly, I’m certain, that they are in no wise free. The governments’ strong men will soon be knocking down their door and putting them into shackles. The truth is they are already in shackles because any time people are forced to pay taxes under threat of violence, how can they be considered free?
It greatly benefits the ruling class if their constituents believe they are special and that the territory in which they reside is somehow superior to all others on earth for whatever reason and therefore deserving of their unquestioning adoration and allegiance. This allows the ruling class to control the citizens to one degree or another. As long as the people of a territory have this inordinate affection for the place of their birth or citizenship, the ruling class are able to maintain their grip on the power they’ve attained and get the majority of their constituents to do THEIR bidding. In fact, most are more than willing to give up a large portion of their hard earned income to the ruling class thinking that the ruling class is working for them. I believe it’s especially true in a, so called, democracy, where people get to vote for their rulers as these people are deluded into believing they are the ones who are in control. But nothing could be further from the truth as my “stop paying their taxes” example amply illustrates. Of course there are a myriad of other examples that could be given.
I remember hearing Obama just a while back in a speech referring to “American exceptionalism”(Bush used it as well and others have too) a phrase that has been used Ad nauseam by the ruling class. Why do they think America is “exceptional”? Or do they really think it is. I doubt it. It’s more likely that they use this terminology to instill false pride in their subjects once again deluding them into believing they possess something that others who live outside their own particular territory do not possess. What the American rulers do believe is that they possess more power than any other ruling class outside their particular territory and they have the military might to prove it to the foreign powers and the ever growing police state to prove it domestically. The message they continually emit at a high frequency is: “Do what we say or else”.
Many Americans like to gloat about the military might of the U.S. and is it any wonder when every single day they are inundated with advertisements displaying the US’s military might and reminding us to thank our veterans, who are scattered around the globe, fighting for our freedom (more like maintaining the empire and pushing our weight around) I still have not figured out what it is that they have done that has made me one ounce freer but if the NFL is in agreement then it must be true. I personally believe going around bombing the crap out of other people doesn’t make more people like you, especially when there’s so much collateral damage. It’s called blow-back and unintended consequences which the vast majority in government seem to totally disregard. The only veteran’s who had anything to do with any Americans’ freedom would be those who fought in the Revolutionary War, fighting for our independence and even that was an illusion because all they did was exchange one form of tyranny for another. Our founders were themselves deluded in believing that “government” I.E. the State, could be “by the people” and “for the people” because all governments that have ever existed are by their very nature coercive and ultimately seek what is in their own best interest. That’s the nature of “The State”
But We Need Government
It is thought that government is necessary to maintain order and to prevent injustice from unscrupulous people since people can’t be trusted to govern themselves or to do the right thing or to keep their contracts. I suppose, in theory, if the government was made up of robots this may be true but of course, even then, people would have to program the robots so…back to square one. The same people that the citizens of a territory seek to protect themselves from are the same people who would obviously seek positions of power and indeed they do. And even those who may seek it for the alleged benefit of their constituents will ultimately become drunken with the benefits the position offers and succumb to the temptations of power. I think this should be pretty obvious to anyone over the age of, let’s say, 16 since that’s when most Americans have their first experience in having to get permission from the government to drive a car.
So what are we to do? How can we ever have good government when government’s are made up of people who can’t be trusted. I’d like to suggest that we simply do away with that unnecessary layer of the untrustworthy people that make up government by doing away with government altogether and allow people the freedom to make their own choices based upon the Non-aggression principle. You can do anything you want so long as it doesn’t aggress upon anyone else’ person, property or freedom. And you can enter into voluntary contracts with whomever you choose for whatever purposes you like using whatever form of exchange you choose that both parties agree to.
(There are remedies to a breach of contract even without the force of government believe it or not and I believe they are much more effective in the private realm as are all non government remedies for conflict. Anything the government can do the private sector can do more effectively and more efficiently and even with less prejudice.)
Now I know what you’re thinking. “But what about those who do aggress; what about those who do steal, kill, assault, damage property and any other form of aggression you can think of?” Well don’t despair because there are answers. Of course we all understand that humans have a baser nature that, if not kept in check, can and will act with violence against their fellow man to get what they want. At least we should know that. I know there are some in the Libertarian camp that believe mankind is basically good but I believe history is replete with examples of the degenerate nature of mankind on full display. I’m not saying that man is not capable of doing good but it does take effort and it’s really not his nature. Yes, I know that doing good is ultimately in our own best interest and that’s why libertarians believe men will generally act in their own best interests so, they will ultimately cooperate with one another but I would still ague that if that were true then we wouldn’t be where we are right now would we? Men very often act contrary to their own best interests and i contend that it’s because of our fallen nature. Non the less I would still rather cut out that extra layer we talked about earlier because there’s no net gain in having it.
Choosing government is just asking to be someone else’ slave because government can never be benevolent since it doesn’t produce anything to support itself it must take from those that do produce and the only way to do that consistently is by threat of violence. And of course those to whom they do give money or benefits, they must steal from someone else first. Bottom line: government should never be able to do anything that the individual cannot do and since stealing is wrong they would not be able to tax anyone and would die. Sounds good to me! Of course government does almost everything that is unlawful for individuals to do now don’t they? Think about it.
I’m not going to delineate here the finer points of Anarcho-Capitalism or Free Market Anarchy or whatever you want to call it. There are abundant resources for research. What I am suggesting is that there is an alternative that a great deal of thought has gone into for many years that most people are simply unaware of. Just because you’ve never heard of it or what you have heard sounds crazy to you doesn’t mean it doesn’t deserve your consideration. I believe libertarian philosophy and Anarchy are the most consistent philosophies of how a society should work that I’ve ever seen. I also believe they are very much in line with what the Bible teaches. You know… do unto others… and all that. (God, through the Apostle Paul commends believers to, as much as possible, live peaceably with all men) So if you haven’t read or listened to the reasons for Free Market Anarchy then you can’t rationally point out it’s shortcomings can you?
You can start your free education right here at Mises.org and type in the search: Libertarian Anarchy. You’ll get a plethora of articles that will very likely answer most if not all your questions. Of course there is no shortage of skeptics and critics abound. Thus far I have yet to see any criticism leveled against Libertarian and or Anarchy that cannot be adequately and or thoroughly debunked. That’s because, in my opinion, the ideas are fundamentally sound and based on logic. It’s just good ole’ fashion common sense.
Here’s an article I like on Libertarian Anarchism: Responses to Ten Objections