The question I ask myself to work out my legislative political views is this…
In this situation is it right for me (or some other person) to use force against a neighbour?
If my answer is “yes” then I support legislative force and government interference in the situation.
If my answer is “no” then I oppose legislative force and government interference in the situation.
I have noticed that sometimes other people will think it is not right for them to use force in a situation but that it is right for government to use force in that same situation. Why do they have a discrepancy? Why would someone think it is right for government to do something that would be wrong for them to do by themselves? They must think that government is special. They must think that government is above their own moral limitations.
An attempt to explain this discrepancy was made to me in a recent discussion. The explanation given was that the government (in this case the court system) is like a father settling disputes amongst its children.
I think viewing government as a father is idolatry.
Questions for the readers…
Do you believe there are situations where it would be wrong for an individual to use force but right for government?
If so, how do you explain the discrepancy?
It is impossible that the people can justly delegate any duty to the Government which they themselves dont posess as of Right. They only do so unjustly.
Eg The Government has no legitimate right to oppress a minority simply because the People have no legitimate Moral authority to delegate such a duty.
The Bogus Utilitarian ‘Mandate of the majority’ which is supposed to legitimise Mobocracy is a travesty. And Government is not our Guardian/ our Parents…. but our servant….etc