From the White-PillBox: Part 43
Another logically inconsistent position of statism: the people in government are our servants; the people in government are our leaders.
This installment of the White Pill series offers another example of the internal contradictions of statism. As explained in essay 36, one of statism’s fundamental weaknesses (and thus a major White Pill) is how so many of its positions lead to logical inconsistencies.
In this essay we examine two very common perceptions of those in government: 1) they are our servants, who are there to follow our wishes, and 2) they are our leaders who must be obeyed, else we suffer the consequences.
We pay their salaries - and they better not forget it!
That’s what the statist often says about politicians, bureaucrats and law enforcers (though curiously, he rarely says it to them).
He genuinely sees himself as the boss, in charge and calling the shots. This notion comes from a connection he perceives between the taxes he pays and the salary that government employees draw.
This represents a monumental achievement in the exercise of his rational cognitive skills. Unfortunately, this deep insight seems to exhaust his mental faculties.
That’s because he also holds another classic position:
Government is the authority: it makes the laws, and we are obliged to obey them
Essentially he believes in authority figures whose rules he must obey, on pain of punishment. He feels that obedience is an obligation - indeed, a moral duty 1.
To solidify his belief, he blindly accepts the use of titles as part of their names 2. He shows due respect for some authority figures' special clothing, sometimes adorned with shiny or colorful badges.
The statist stands in awe at the grandiose buildings in which they conduct their important business. He casts his eyes upwards at their stately portraits.
He also raises his children to look up, to honor the pictures of political leaders lining their classrooms. He expects his children to pledge their allegiance to the cloth symbol of their power.
These are clear examples of how the statist regards government personnel as above the rest of us; as leaders; as authorities.
Freedom is slavery 3
The statist has the uncanny ability to hold a view in his head that essentially says, “my freedom comes from my leaders, who are also my servants - servants that I dutifully obey.”
It is more than contradictory. It is schizophrenic. The statist can maintain a faulty and fragmented perception of reality, unbothered by holding inconsistent and contradictory thoughts.
The normal world of consensual interactions
In the private sphere, our relationships are consensual. Thus our interactions with others are generally seamless; there are no inconsistencies in our mutual understandings. For example:
In our voluntarily chosen services
Sometimes we interact with others for the services and value they provide (hiring a mechanic; joining a church or club).
But by engaging with them, we are not magically put in subjugation to them as our rulers. Neither we, or those we engage, entertain this peculiar idea.
In our voluntarily chosen leadership
Sometimes we explicitly choose a relationship in which the other party provides leadership skills (as an employee, we have a manager; our team has a coach; we engage a fitness instructor). In these cases we agree to certain rules, applicable only to that arrangement. And while it is possible those rules can be broken, this does not exact coercive punishment, imprisonment, or death.
And in every case the parties are free to opt out, since the arrangements are voluntary.
But then, there is the State
Perversely, to the statist, government and the common person are engaged in what can only be called a bizarre and toxic relationship.
Bizarre, because in the normal world, we would classify as insane the idea that a servant who executes our will, is also a ruler we must legally and morally follow.
Toxic, because under the guise of our protector, they take our wealth, and make rules by which we live. And they punish us for non-compliance.
And in no case are we free to opt out, as the arrangements are not voluntary.
Conclusion
To be sure the progress of freedom is hampered. But the White Pill is eye-opening. At the root, a major impediment of freedom is nothing more than a weak, pitiful mindset that literally contradicts itself.
It is no coincidence that these are also the beliefs of abused spouses and cult members. For example, see the section “The State as a cult” here.
Examples: President x; Congressmen x; Mr. Speaker; Madame Chairperson; Governor x; Mayor x; Judge x; Officer x; Agent x (even better, Special Agent x). Not to mention the titles added to the names of every single member of the military and law enforcement.
Doublethink (see George Orwell, “1984”)