The Ideal Randian State
by
Anthony Gregory
by Anthony Gregory
Murray
Rothbard argued in his classic work "Robert
Nozick and the Immaculate Conception of the State" against
Nozickian minarchism, on the basis that no State has ever or ever
would develop in the perfect, pristine and uncorrupted circumstances
in which the Nozickian night-watchman State must be born in order
to exist.
The
Randians, however, know that a perfect State cannot come about through
"immaculate conception." This is just religious hogwash.
The Randian State must be planned, crafted, and drawn up in blueprints;
manufactured and implemented by individualists working unanimously
to usher in an Ideal Capitalist Utopian society; and observed and
respected as infallible by all people who live within its jurisdiction.
We
can wonder how the central planning of a Randian State would begin,
commence and conclude. Objectivists disagree with each other on
many matters. Politically, they share no uniform foreign policy.
An intelligent minority of visible students of Rand seem to favor
peace and nonintervention, basing
their dissenting view on Randian principles. In the more inclusive
Randian circles, even some disagreement on minarchism vs. anarchism
is allowed. Some fans of Rand’s work have trouble reconciling her
true brilliance and importance with some of her quirky views
and her even quirkier, less rational modern followers.
Despite
these disagreements and discrepancies, I have, from surfing the
net lately, come to form in my mind a composite model of the ideal
Randian State. Now, certainly, many Objectivists, and probably Rand
herself, would dispute the accuracy of my design. I mean them no
offense. But based on what a good number of Randians online seem
to believe, I do contend the average vocal Randian advocates
a set of policies which, if put into practice, would imply a State
quite similar in character to what is described below.
First
off, as we know, the Randian State would not "initiate force,"
since that would violate the
central tenet of Rand’s political philosophy. It would therefore
not regulate industry or even
collect taxes.
At
the same time, the Randian State would maintain a monopoly on the
use of violence, so as to prevent another State from emerging in
the same geographical location. We know that most Randians would
expect at least this much from their State, for this coercive monopoly
is the bare minimum criterion necessary for a State to be considered
a "State." Without a monopoly on violence, so believe
the Objectivists, society would collapse into a Somalia-style anarchy.
Without a State, we would have warlordism. Rand herself warned,
in The
Virtue of Selfishness, that "If society provided no
organized protection against force, it would compel every citizen
to go about armed, to turn his home into a fortress, to shoot any
strangers approaching his door"; and that "the use of
physical force – even its retaliatory use – cannot be left at the
discretion of individual citizens." Even
though, at times, some Objectivists have challenged this Randian
principle; that it is a Randian principle – that a monopoly
in violence, including retaliatory violence, is a necessary characteristic
of a Randian State, as conceived by Rand and most of her followers
– of this much we can be fairly certain.
This
minimal coercive monopoly that is the Randian State would enforce
"intellectual property rights," protect people’s reputations
against "slanderers" and "libelers," restore
the now-defunct "property rights" of Western companies
over Middle Eastern oil appropriated through colonial mercantilism
more than ninety years ago, and carry out some other limited functions.
The
Randian State would also have a very
aggressive foreign policy, unhesitant
to target civilians, to the degree that, in the months following
9/11, it may well have nuked the Middle East and killed hundreds
of thousands, or even hundreds of millions, of people – both to
avenge the deaths of 9/11 and also to reassert American dominance
and get "our"
oil back from the Arabs and Muslims who stole it. In responding
to 9/11 in a Randian style, the U.S. government would have approached
the action with the "standard value," as
one Objectivist put it, that the "rights of one American,
whether a soldier or a civilian, are worth more than the lives
of all men, women and children in all these [Middle East] nations
combined." If, during this hypothetical vengeance killing,
you had spoken out against the nuclear annihilation of millions
of people, you might have been tried for treason, for, under a Randian
State during wartime, no individual can be allowed to spread doubts
over certain Fundamental Truths – namely, that the Randian State
protects individual rights and Western Civilization, and represents
everything that is Objectively Good about humanity.
But
the Randian State would not initiate force or collect taxes.
The
State would be completely separated from religion, and any other
ideological organization or predisposition other than Objectivism
Itself (which, of course, is The
Truth, and should be enforced by the government). The
military would abandon any remaining attachment it might have
to the Christian, and therefore irrational witchdoctor-like, "Just
War Theory." The courthouses would be guided by Objectivist
ethics, enforcing intellectual property rights and the corporate
charters created by the State.
But
the Randian State would not aggress against people, nor would it
tax them or regulate industry.
The
Ideal Randian State would uphold the values of Western Civilization,
which are best understood by reading Ayn Rand. As the U.S. government
is now, it is far from the Objectivist ideal, since it is too
hesitant to attack civilians and yet it also initiates force
too much through the mechanisms of taxation and antitrust law. However,
the U.S. government, being an integral, necessary part of America
– and certainly far better than any possible alternative in the
real world! – does, to a large degree, represent and embody the
best of Western Civilization even in its current, imperfect, overly
bureaucratic form. Accordingly, either the Ideal Randian State or
the current U.S. government has the right – nay, the duty –
to destroy uncivilized States, not worry too much about the savages
who die or what the survivors among them might think, and thus ensure
that America, which is Objectively
so much more in tune with Western values, scientific knowledge
and The Truth than its small dictatorship enemies, survives forever
as a symbol for the entire world to follow.
But,
being modest and limited in its functions as it is, the Randian
State would never initiate force.
A
Randian State would go around the world toppling non-Randian States,
so long as it does so in a non-altruistic fashion. Destroying evil
States is a positive good, and a Randian State, being the positive
good that it is, could never be blamed if anything went wrong during
its escapades of invasion and foreign intervention. Anything bad
that happened – any innocents that died during the Randian rampage
to cleanse the earth of savagery and anti-mind, anti-reason, anti-reality
values – would of course be the fault of the Randian State’s enemies;
as we all know, the Randian State, categorically and unconditionally,
cannot be culpable for any damage caused by its clashes with less
civilized States: the Randian State does not initiate force by definition:
anyone hurt during a conflict involving the Randian State either
had it coming, or must file his complaints with another, less perfect
State. And, Truth be told, any ethical person who lived in a non-Randian
State would not only "acknowledge
the moral right of a free nation to bomb" him, but would
Objectively want to be bombed by the more Randian State,
regardless of his chances of dying in the process, for such bombing
presents his only plausible chances of salvation, freedom, and deliverance
to the realm of rationality and individualism.
If
two Randian States existed at the same time on Earth, they would,
of course, never have any conflict with each other, since they would
both be right about everything. But if, perhaps by some disruption
in the space-time fabric, they did come into conflict with each
other, the Randian State with the more Randians in it would presumably
be in the right. Or, perhaps they would both be right as they tore
each other to shreds.
But
neither Randian State would ever initiate force or regulate the
economy.
Living
in the Ideal Randian State would be superbly swell, unless you happened
to disagree fundamentally with Objectivism. Since Objectivism is
The Truth, and since any decent State should reflect It, certainly
there is little room in a free, Objectivist society for non-Objectivist
barbarians.
Smoking
would be legal in all public places – perhaps even mandatory. (Okay,
this is a cheap shot. But we do know that anti-smoking ads would
be one of the first government programs abolished.)
Indeed,
the Randian State would be absolutely perfect, limited just enough
never to violate anyone’s individual rights, but empowered just
enough to make the world safe for and conducive to Randian democracy.
It would keep its massive nuclear arsenal just in case it had a
reason to wipe one billion people off the face of the earth to make
more room for the individualists in the Randian State.
Libertarians
might even find the situation quite tolerable. They had better,
anyway, for the alternative would either be prosecution, punishment,
or – worst of all – excommunication from Randian society.
Yes,
oh yes, the Randian State would be wonderful, and never collect
taxes or initiate force. But if it did happen to collect
taxes, it would have to be for the military, and therefore the tax
rate could conceivably climb as high as 80%. But this wouldn’t be
so bad, by
Randian standards, so long as the money is being used for individualistic,
rational, and egoistic purposes – such as bombs, warplanes, and
uniforms – rather than anything collectivist, mystic, and altruistic.
For,
as nearly any Objectivist can tell you, being taxed 5% of your wealth
for welfare is a far greater burden and offense than being taxed
80% of your wealth for the military.
So
maybe the Randian State would tax, and regulate industry
to the extent necessary for national defense and the military. But
none of this taxing or regulating – and, certainly, none of the
tax-financed invading and bombing – would be an initiation of force,
since, as we know, a Randian State could never initiate force.
Perhaps
some of you might wonder about this Randian State, and believe you
have discovered within its framework a number of irreconcilable
contradictions. If so, you are obviously wrong. Check your premises,
and rest assured that the Ideal Randian State is not only obtainable
and desirable; it is the only possible political organization in
any way compatible with reality, human reasoning, and, most important,
today's popular Objectivist theory.
May
18, 2005
Anthony
Gregory [send him mail]
is a writer and musician who lives in Berkeley, California. He is
a research assistant at the Independent
Institute. See
his webpage for more
articles and personal information.
Copyright
© 2005 LewRockwell.com
Anthony
Gregory Archives
|