Liberty

Liberty, Authority, and the State

by Joe McCarthy

History is one continuous cycle of authority. According to Vilfredo Pareto, the aim of any successful state schemata is to lay the groundwork for men of ability to rule. Consistent with Michels' view that an "iron law of oligarchy" exists, Pareto understood that equalitarian nostrums were essentially utopian in nature, as the very essence of society requires strong men to command and more humble men to obey. This dictum, consciously or unconsciously, has been wholly accepted by those who view it as the prerogative of a societal elite to rule; while recognizing the perhaps uncomfortable fact that the masses are asses. This Platonic ideal of the philosopher-king has loomed large over Western society since it was conceived, and its impact on twentieth century history was enormous. The twentieth century, being the age of authority, may carry its creed well into the twenty first; but for it to do so, specific realities must be acknowledged and addressed; one of them being the ever present groundswell of revolt among the unsuccessful -- the Undermen.

A throwback to the era of absolutism, the longing for authority is a manifestation of a Will to Power, which desires to remove all obstructions erected by those forces of mediocrity who would deny the Overman his place in the sun. The corollary is that anything that is seen as helpful in uplifting the unwashed masses, with their penchant for frivolity, is looked upon with disdain. In the political sphere, all guns are therefore turned on mass democracy. As the 'iron law' exists and has always existed, the germane response is to move beyond pie in the sky notions seeking an unachievable nirvana suitable for the other-worldliness of abstraction but unfit for practical reality. The 'equality' cult, as it exists, amounts to little more than a call for the unaccomplished to seek to tear down their betters. The effect of mass democracy, much which is subtle and not easily discernable to the unlearned mind, is to give the appearance of popular rule while in reality empowering a managerial elite. Hegel noted that the more the common people think power resides in them, the more they refrain from exercising said power. This observation plays out on election day, as voter turnout is seen to be pathetically subpar.

A further effect is something we have seen in all industrial democracies: the phenomenon of the welfare state, which in its misguided notion of altruism empowers the botched and ill bred while punishing the bearers of civilization. This process, which promotes failure plus laxity, also serves to prolong suffering from generation to generation. Surely there is nothing more axiomatic than the fact that what is subsidized is produced in greater quantities, and state subsidies compound this procedure exponentially; as we have seen with an increasingly dogged underclass which despite massive outlays to 'fight poverty' has continued in its woeful maleficence. Put simply, subsidizing and rewarding the impoverished has sustained the ones presently existing and has even added to the dilemma.

The recognition of the law of inequality is the summum bonum for civilizational advance. The best in man cannot be found in systems where his 'rights' are defined within the framework of being ruled poorly. Just as a man who represents himself has a fool for a client, the man who eschews expertise in favor of a fraudulent concept of 'self-governance' has a fool for a leader. Besides, as we have seen, even in the pathological state of mass suffrage, it is certain specialists who rule, albeit with a mask on. Again, the 'iron law' holds firm.

Of course, the occasional defect found in democratic institutions is not a 'thing in itself' as such institutions, properly structured, have historically borne fruit. The limited democracy of the Athenians in place before the rise of Pericles is one such example, and it is surely true that with a populace properly inculcated with the principles of ordered liberty, such an instance can be repeated. But as things operate at present, the hoi polloi stand as an ignominious example of Jefferson's quip that "Those who expect to be ignorant and free, expect what there never was and never will be."

In building a consensus it is thought valuable to look to democratic institutions for solutions, which although prescriptive in nature, are thought to amass the sum total of the General Will. While firm direction is sadly lacking in pursuing a policy of mass participation, the vox populi is held in the utmost esteem. Order, stability, and homogeneity are all subordinated to the cause of mass participation, which as we have seen, amounts to an illusion in practice, if not a delusional misstep. The desirability of liberty, an abstract good, is pursued dogmatically independent of respect for the necessary prerequisites which enable its real life application. The preconditions for liberty can be laid out as follows, and dangerous is the path tread which neglects these concerns.

ORDER: Ordered liberty, as Burke observed, is liberty inviolate, for without order, liberty is impossible. Raucous mobs or unethical rabbles are incapable of being free, for they lack the requisite goodness conducive to the free society. The society lacking in order in private stations will look to the state as its protector, and as Nock noted, the state is the natural foe of human liberty.

VIRTUE: Order's close cousin; it is the necessary companion of the stable super-structure. This pillar of civilization is both an enabler and check on liberty as it both promotes the truly free man while containing his vices. Too often are the pseudo-stalwarts of 'freedom' the banner carriers of a false dichotomy, presenting any checks on man's base impulses as a form of 'tyranny'. In truth, the immoral man cannot be
free, for as Augustine rightly observed, a man has as many masters as he has vices.

HOMOGENEITY: It has been observed that the authoritarian prism is a sine qua non in states lacking in social and cultural cohesiveness, manifesting itself in ethnic, religious, and linguistic standardization. This holds true, for the balkanized state is the disorderly state, and the disorderly state is the leviathan state securely enforcing its will to bring about calm.

In future endeavors it will be fortuitous to balance our prospects for individual liberty with the ironclad demand for authority's predominance. This will necessarily be arbitrary, as the line cannot clearly be drawn. But that such a boundary is essential is seemingly not in question.