Valuing Liberal Democracy? This Market Anarchist Doesn't
by Christopher Awuku
January 25, 2007
Liberal democracy is the "well loved" political system presently used in
nearly all Western countries. Liberal democracy is often championed for its
"tolerance" and "freedoms." The noted political scientist Francis Fukuyama
even once stated that liberal democracy was the "end of history," meaning that
liberal democracy might be the "final" political system ever devised. Well,
despite its "positives," liberal democracy is still force.
Tolerance and pluralism
Two of the defining aspects of liberal democracy are the concepts of
tolerance and pluralism. These manifest themselves with the coexistence of
differing political views. Such viewpoints then possess the opportunity to
compete for political power when periodic elections are held within this
system. So in the USA , the Democrats and Republicans compete for power. In
the UK , the Labour Party and the Conservatives compete for power. In Germany
, the Social Democrats and Christian Democrats continually compete for power.
In essence, this does lead to a "free market," so to speak, of views that
are seeking to form a government, and a market of opinions which a voter in the
electorate can choose from. Nevertheless, one is often choosing as to how much
force is exerted against him or her and not choosing whether force should be
eliminated. In virtually all liberal democracies, political parties advocate
some kind of state. The presence of government is force, in part, since it
denotes monopoly. Can you choose the nature of your police protection? Can
you choose which military would safeguard you from foreign attack? No, you
cannot. At most, one can only choose about the level of force that's applied.
Some parties, for example, might favour lowering taxes or may deregulate the
economy. Nonetheless, the force is always there. Few, if any, liberal
democracies possess parties that advocate the drastic or radical reduction in
the initiation of governmental force. Essentially all political parties within
the "liberal democratic" system desire to maintain the statist status quo.
The perpetuation of liberal democracy
The general "reverence" for liberal democracy is ultimately perpetuated
by the state itself. We are consistently told that we possess "freedom" within
a liberal democratic structure. Some, like US President George "Dubya" Bush,
even equate the concept of liberal democracy with freedom in general. (But of
course, Bush believes Iraqis are free, even though many in Baghdad risk
constant terrorist attacks. Some freedom, huh?)
Granted, liberal democracies are relatively "freer" societies in general
(compare general personal and economic liberties in Norway vis-à-vis North
Korea ). People may also have on average higher living standards and greater
levels of happiness. Nevertheless, the perpetuating cycle of liberal democracy
can be traced to the classroom. In school, we are seldom (if ever) taught of
any rival systems to the liberal democratic order. Within schools, pupils are
taught to value the liberal democratic order. We are also taught that the
state is good and that the state is only out to aid us. Of course, politicians
mandate such instructions to save "their own bacon." They know that a
continuation of the prevailing order only seeks to benefit themselves. Most
would recognise that politicians are power hungry and desire dominion over
others. Due to this impulse, politicians would do whatever it takes to
maintain their supposed supremacy over others. As usual, politicians are
rewarding themselves, whilst not representing our interests. So much for
"representative democracy"! Such a state of affairs is also a continuation of
the presence of "the gun in room." In the linked article, Mr. Molyneux
explains that libertarians should consistently point out the intrinsic force of
government to all non-libertarians. Liberal democracy, by its very nature, has
its finger on the trigger of "the gun" at all times.
Rights of the people
Liberal democracies are also characterised by upholding the rights of the
citizen, so as to place a curb on governmental powers. Of course, libertarians
would welcome such a thing, in principle. However, in many liberal
democracies, it's not as inspiring as one may believe.
Article 7 of the Grundgezetz (i.e., the "Basic Law" or constitution) of
Germany outlines a right to education. More explicitly, it states that the
"entire education system" should be administered by the state! Even private
schools are regulated by the German government. So the average German citizen
doesn't possess the liberty to actively "opt out" of the state's influence in
education The rights enshrined in a liberal democratic constitution clearly
don't have to be limited to preserving negative rights only. If one examines
the United States constitution, an amendment exists which brought into being
the income tax. Even though the Founding Fathers desired the existence of a
small "constitutionally limited" government, this plan failed to curtail and
forestall the eventual growth of the federal government.
Liberal Democracy is government, and government is force
Think of how a liberal democracy must fund itself. It is funded via
taxation, which constitutes force against the individual. Governments in
liberal democracies often regulate businesses and industry, hence imposing
force on business owners and entrepreneurs. As I stated earlier, choice
doesn't exist in regards to governmental services. Liberal democracies don't
offer a choice between police protection, armed forces or fire protection.
German citizens possess no opportunity to opt out of the state sphere,
especially in regards to education.
All in all, liberal democracy may "mean well" and attempt to secure
citizens' freedoms, but it still taxes, spends and initiates force like all
other governments. By logically adhering to libertarian principles, only market
anarchy can provide a situation in which all human interactions are voluntary.
Only market anarchy can ensure the complete non-initiation of force in human
affairs.
Digg
Reddit STR forum
Christopher Awuku lives in the UK and works in the voluntary/community
sector. He runs a market anarchist blog at http://chrislib.blogspot.com
Christopher Awuku Archive
Reprint Rights
back to Strike The Root
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
