.


SCI LIBRARY

Libertarian Land Philosophy:
Man's Eternal Dilemma

Oscar B. Johannsen, Ph.D.



BOOK V: COOPERATION, GOVERNMENT AND THE STATE

Chapter 2 - Government



This is not a treatise on the nature of government, or the state and its genesis and growth. Still in virtue of the tremendous importance which government plays in the affairs of men, and particularly as it relates to land, money, and freedom, a discussion of it may prove worthwhile.

In attacking this problem, logically a definition of government should be given at the outset. However, as this writer's conception of the true nature of government is so radically different from the usual one, possibly some background is necessary to avoid the definition being dismissed out of hand.

Three questions should be posed.

First, Do men require government?

Second: Are men capable of government?

Third: What is the degree of government of which men are capable?

Usually, it is assumed, without much argument, that men require government if for no other reason than for protection of life and property. As far as men being capable of government, their conceit assures them that such is the ease. About the only one of the three questions which is seriously discussed is the degree of government which men can administer. This has been particularly true in arguments on world governments.

Do men require government? Those who assert that this is too obvious to deserve consideration should be reminded that mathematicians discovered that the questioning of axioms which had been accepted uncritically for thousands of years led to the development of new geometry's and a better understanding of the mathematical discipline, So, possibly it will do no harm to analyze some of the more or less obvious assumptions related to government.

Do men require government? Let us see. In the discussion which follows some of it is repetitious of what has been given before. However, it seems necessary in order to present a logical argument.

Each man is born with the right to life just because he is born. And this right to life is equal for all men, for no person has a superior right to life than another. If someone has a superior right, it should be possible to demonstrate it. But so far no one has been able to do so. A king's son has no better right to life than a cobbler's son. If he has, why? Just because his father happens to be king? What occurs if his father is deposed? Is his right to life less now? Since it cannot be shown that any individual has a superior right to life than anyone else, the conclusion is forced upon us that all men have equal rights to life.

To live, each individual must labor in order to acquire the necessities to maintain life -- the primary needs being food, clothing and shelter. There is only one place on which a person can labor and from which the person can obtain these things, and that is the land. Thus, every person has the right of access to the land for this comes from the right to life. If the individual does not have access to the only source from which to obtain the necessary goods to sustain that life, then the right to life is meaningless. Since all rights to life are equal, so are all rights to access to the land equal.

But this gives rise to a problem caused by two physical facts. One is that land varies in productivity. One piece may be gold-bearing land, another fertile farm land, and still another utterly useless. That is, land represents different opportunities; some excellent, some mediocre, some worthless.

The other fact is that two things cannot occupy the same place at the same time. This means that two men cannot occupy the same land at the same time.

Now, justice requires that all men have equal rights to the opportunities of the land for all men have equal rights to life. But since two things cannot occupy the saline place at the same time, some men will have access to the better opportunities to which they are no more entitled than anyone else.

Man's eternal dilemma, then, is how to divide up the unequal opportunities of the earth among the equal claimants to them with justice to all.

The contradictions posed above constitute the reasons why men require government for the only way in which these contradictions can be resolved is by the collective action all men.

Government is a group of men who divide up the unequal opportunities of the land among themselves -- the equal claimants to those opportunities -- on a basis of justice.

If anyone can devise a means of allocating these opportunities justly without the collective action of men, then government would not be necessary. But this appears to be as impossible to do as it is to live without eating.

If the above is government, then the second question must be considered. Are men capable of government? It is difficult to answer this question except indirectly. The world men inhabit appears to be one of perfect harmony. Everything dovetails with everything else. Plants, trees and animals all harmonize with their surroundings or they would not survive. To live, an animal or plant must have certain characteristics. Fish have the necessary physical requirements to live in water. Birds have the wings needed to fly. Men have the necessary physical characteristics to breathe and live on the earth- Since this is so, as not only men but all of Nature have the necessary faculties to survive, it follows that since men must establish government, they have the ability to do so.

This argument does not have the directness and conviction that one would wish. This is particularly true because men have made such a miserable mess of government. If anything. history would seem to prove that men are incapable of government. But, on the other hand, men probably have never really established a government at any time or in any place, What they have set up is something different -- States. Possibly the closet practical examples of governments were those collective arrangements which the Indian tribes in America had. They seemed to have established something approximating government in that all the adult men participated and they probably did try to allocate the hunting grounds among themselves with some degree of fairness.

Most men would not be bothered spending too much time on recondite arguments on whether they have the ability to govern or not. If government is necessary, whether they have the ability or not, men will make a stab at it. However, the question is worth considering. If men are not capable of government and yet still need it, at least, they may recognize their deficiency and maintain a healthy skepticism of any solution offered.

Once it is conceded that men are capable of government, the third question comes to the fore. What is the degree of government of which men are capable?

It does not follow because men are capable of government, that they are capable of government on a city, state, national or international level. Because men can Jump up in the air, it does not follow that they can jump up a thousand feet. There are limits to everything. There is a limit on how old a man can live; how fast anything can travel; the dimensions of the earth. Just as everything is limited, so too the degree of government which men can administer is limited.

But the limit is not easily determined. Inasmuch as government is a group of men, and since it is difficult for more than a few hundred men to come together and participate actively one with the other, it would follow that the degree of government must be quite small. Probably it is just above the family level. Only trial and error would determine the optimum degree and this might vary as conditions change. But at any rate, the degree of government would be small because each man would have to he a part of it and each would have to participate in the allocation of the land.

For justice to rule, the allocation of the land would have to be on an auction basis wherein the parcels of land are auctioned off to the highest bidders . Each area of land would also probably have to be relatively small. That would also depend upon circumstances. In built up areas as cities, the area of land would probably be quite small. In rural areas, it night be fairly large.

Thus, government is just big enough so that all can participate in it. Its function is to lease the land in its area by auction, plus the corollary one of dividing up the rent among all the members of the government on a pro rata basis. This leasing of the land might be on an annual or biennial basis. It could be for five or ten year leases, if so desired by the members. Experience would determine which would be the best length of time.

It will be noted that under this definition, government is not responsible for post offices, education, roads and the many different services which all States presently administer. These functions belong in the marketplace.

Governments, usually with the best of intentions, have intervened in the educational process for so long that many people have lost sight of the fact that education is the responsibility of the parent. Thus, for a person to remind them that education is not a function of government is to lead to expressions of horror and dismay. How could one he so benighted as to believe that? Nonetheless, just as the feeding and clothing of the child is the parents' responsibility. so is the feeding of his mind.

In America, primary and secondary education is, for the most part, carried on in schools owned and operated by local governments. As such, they are socialized schools. Few in America ever think of them in that light as they are called public schools instead of being called government or state schools. But the fact that they are socialistic institutions has meant that they are heir to the inefficiencies and problems associated with any socialistic endeavor. It has been fortunate for America that the local communities have been in charge, even though hampered severely by the state boards of education which direct them.

Until, relatively recently, local control has meant that the people have been close enough to the schools to prevent some of the more serious socialistic abuses from arising. However, as the people have increasingly migrated to the cities, and as the cities have grown larger the people's control has been breaking down. The typical entrenched bureaucracy of socialistic institutions has been taking over control. The most glaring example of this is New York City. That city has become a battleground between opposing vested interests. On the one side are the teachers united in their labor unions. On the other side is the centralized administrative bureaucracy. In between are the children, the unfortunate pawns in the power struggle. One attempt after another has been made to decentralize the educational process, not because the bureaucrats wanted decentralization but because the parents, particularly of minority groups, have demanded it. It became only too obvious to the black parents as well as parents of other groups) that their children were being short-changed and they demanded action. So far, little success has been attained. However, one happy result is that gradually more and more are beginning to recognize that education should be conducted under private auspices, Surprisingly it is the minority groups who seem to have a greater awareness of this. Suggestions are increasingly being advanced that the government's aid should take the form of financial help rather than of operating the schools. One suggestion has been that vouchers be given to parents which would be presented to private schools to pay the cost of their children attending such schools. This has certain disadvantages. The principal one is that "he who pays the piper, calls the tune". Since the government would be doing the paying, it would call the tune, and what is wanted is to divorce government from education entirely.

There are non-profit private primary and secondary schools in America. For the most part, they are so superior to the socialized schools that there simply is no comparison. Unfortunately, there are not enough of them.

It seems rather obvious that if Americans want the finest possible educational system, the schools should be operated on a profit-making basis just as any service is. This applies not only to primary and secondary schools, but to our colleges and universities. The privately operated colleges in America are actually not private enterprises in the true sense of the word. They partake of a hybrid character -- partly private, partly eleemosynary. The sooner they are put on a businesslike basis for the purpose of selling the service of a college education on a profit-making basis, the sooner will America have the finest kind of university education possible.

Such a statement as this will, no doubt, be greeted particularly by academia, as the expression of a madman. But, if It is proper to feed the mind as it is now fed, partly by private, partly by eleemosynary and partly by socialistic institutions -- why not the even more important function of feeding the body?

It is precisely because the food industry is operated as a profit-making enterprise that Americans suffer from the happy indisposition of over-indulgence. Put it on the same basis as our educational system is on, and they will probably be in a state of chronic hunger, instead.[1]

There is no more reason for education to he socialized than the raising of food, for to reiterate, education is simply not a function of government.

As for roads, in the early 1800s about five million miles of turnpikes were built by private businessmen in America. If the roads of our country bad been left in the hands of private enterprise, as the manufacture of cars was, our roads would be far superior to anything now in existence. True, a little ingenuity would be required to put roads in the marketplace. The main highways would probably be private toll roads. The streets in the cities and towns would have to be the responsibility of the businesses and homeowners contiguous to them. They, no doubt, would hire private contractors to keep the streets in repair.

Protection is invariably advanced as the principal reason for government. But, it too belongs in the marketplace. No doubt, this statement appears to the reader as the height of absurdity. But the protection of the individual is the individual's own responsibility just as much as the feeding and educating of himself. It is because this fact is still recognized to some degree in the United States that Americans are still permitted to own rifles, although that precious right is constantly under attack.

The argument raised today is that in earlier days it might have been possible for a man to protect himself. His old-fashioned blunderbuss, hanging over his fireplace, epitomized this right and ability. Today, however, it is asserted that the State must protect him. But, that the state is doing a very poor job in what many claim is the one field in which it has competence -- protection -- is obvious. The streets and parks of many of our great cities, as New York, are almost jungles, particularly after dark. With all its modern weapons, the State cannot protect its own citizens.

The result has been that vigilante committees have been springing up throughout the country, particularly in crime infested areas, for the protection of the members of these committees and their families. No doubt, as crime in America increases, there will be an ever greater reliance tot only on volunteer groups but on private police and detective concerns. Individuals wilt hire such firms to protect their homes and themselves. It is being done now.

And, finally, it might be pointed out, when a war erupts, the State does not protect its citizens. On the contrary, it conscripts them to protect the State.

Although this anticipates the following chapter, in order that the reader does not think that the writer is bereft of his reason, it might be well to point out that he does not expect that government, as he visualizes it, will be substituted for the State at the present time.

Government is a voluntaristic organization and operates on a small scale. Today, with the world in a continual turmoil due to the unjust institutions which men have erected, it appears very difficult, indeed, to substitute government for the State. If somehow a people did, it may be that some individuals within the country would seize power and substitute themselves as the State. If this did not occur, some outside power might invade the country, particularly if it contained valuable resources. Something of this order occurred when the white man conquered the Indian. The Indian had some conception of what Government as; the white man did not.

In the following chapter, a brief analysis of the State is made. It might be well, however, at this point to note that over the years the power of the State has been circumscribed. This has arisen as the result of such important influences as custom, tradition, as well as constitutions written or unwritten. Inasmuch as the State has the monopoly of coercion, literally there is nothing it cannot do to those under its control. However, the aforementioned influences have helped to ameliorate its power.

Probably before truly voluntaristic government can be established, the unjust institutions must be removed, or at least recognized and efforts directed toward their removal. It may be a long and difficult task taking generations. It may well be that no area of the world would dare set up the idealized government visualized by the writer until most of the injustices rampant today are eliminated from most of the great nations.

It may well be, however, that the writer is in error. The youth of today are certainly disenchanted with government in almost every nation of the world. They do not seem to have the blind confidence in government that their elders have. They have no desire to be engaged in these insane conflicts in which governments engage almost constantly. Their hearts seem to be in the right place. Unfortunately, their understanding of what is wrong is lacking. Too many of them, with the probable exception of those in communistic countries, look upon socialism as the answer. The youth in countries as the Soviet Union have learned only too well through sad experience that socialism is no answer. If anything, they recognize that the distorted form of market economy existing in the western countries is far superior as regards economic and social freedoms. They wish they had the freedom and opportunities that exist in the western countries. But, at any rate, the youth in most countries of the world recognize something is dreadfully wrong and many, if not most of them, arc increasingly skeptical of the State. With better understanding of the State and Government, possibly they will do what their elders have failed to do.

This writer's purpose is to attempt to indicate what is Government and what its real function is. Also, it is his purpose to point out that Government is a natural and necessary institution because all men have equal rights to the opportunities of the universe, and no two things can occupy the same place at the same time.

He is not so naive as to suppose that the substitution of the State by Government can be achieved cheaply. But, if men recognize what Government really is, then they know what path to take to arrive at it.

At the present time, all attempts at reform are merely efforts to substitute one State by another, either by the ballot box or by violent means. Whether the succeeding State will be better or worse may be largely a matter of good fortune. When the British State was. overthrown here and the America State substituted, it was a gain for the people. The American State was weak and therefore it had to listen to the people to a greater degree than the British State did. Today, the American State is powerful and as its power grows it listens less and less to the people. When the Russian State was overthrown, a far worse one was substituted in the form of the Soviet Union, as the Russian people learned to their sorrow.

Until men recognize what Government is, no doubt, they will continue to erect State after State. It is to be hoped however, that as knowledge of the difference between Governments and States grows, the States will tend more and more to become Governments until that happy day arrives when all States disappear and Governments exist in their stead.


Recapitulation


Government is required to resolve the contradictions posed by the physical fact that land is of unequal opportunity and two men cannot occupy the same place at the same time, plus the ethical fact that all men have equal rights to all the opportunities of the land.

Government is a group of men in an area who divide up the unequal opportunities among themselves on a basis of justice to all.

As men cannot act together collectively and still maintain justice if the number of men is large, or the extent of land too great, government must be barely above the family level--on the order of the New England Town Hall governments with the land area small enough so all members of the community can be acquainted with it.


NOTES


  1. Oscar B. Johannsen, "Private Schools for All"


Preface and Introduction

BOOK 1

Chapter 1 * Chapter 2

BOOK 2

Chapter 1 * Chapter 2 * Chapter 3 * Chapter 4
Chapter 5 * Chapter 6

BOOK 3

Chapter 1 * Chapter 2

BOOK 4

Chapter 1 * Chapter 2

BOOK 5

Chapter 1 * Chapter 2

BOOK 6

Chapter 1 * Chapter 2

BOOK 7

Chapter 1 * Chapter 2 * Chapter 3

BOOK 8

Chapter 1

BOOK 9

Chapter 1 * Chapter 2

BOOK 10

Bibliography