Home   |   The Issues  |  Creed of Freedom  |  Membership  |  Activities  |  Awards  |  Unfiltered News  |  Reality
Zone

VOLUNTARISM

© 2010 January 25 by G. Edward Griffin

There is a lot of discussion today about
voluntarism as applied to social conduct. It is the concept of
allowing people to follow their conscience regarding the rules of
society instead of forcing them to obey under penalty of fine or
imprisonment. This concept was included in The Creed of
Freedom under the heading of Freedom-of-choice. It says:

I believe that desirable social and
economic objectives are better achieved by voluntary action
than by coercion of law. I believe that social tranquility and
brotherhood are better achieved by tolerance, persuasion, and
the power of good example than by coercion of law. I believe
that those in need are better served by charity, which is the
giving of one's own money, than by welfare, which is the
giving of other people's money through coercion of
law.

The advantages of this concept are obvious
to individualists who value freedom more than conformity, but
collectivists have trouble with it. They feel that, if a certain
behavior is good, then “there ought to be a law” to require everyone
to comply. If we look only at the behavior in question, it is easy
to be enthusiastic about having everyone emulate it. However, if we
also consider the consequences of forcing them to do so under
penalty of fine or imprisonment, we realize that freedom is given up
in the process. Rules for this and rules for that are added to the
statute books by the thousands until we find ourselves ensnarled in
a spider web of so many strands that it is impossible to perform
even the most common tasks without violating some law, even if it’s
unknown to us. One of the hallmarks of modern totalitarian systems
is that all citizens eventually become lawbreakers, and this makes
it possible to punish anyone who falls into disfavor with the ruling
authorities. All they have to do is track your behavior for a while
and discover which laws you are breaking. No one is exempt.

As stated elsewhere in The Creed of
Freedom, the legitimate function of the state is to protect the
life, liberty, and property of its citizens and, in that defensive
role, it is logical that force may have to be used. Individualists
have no problem with that. However, in the collectivist world in
which we live today, 99% of the laws have nothing to do with the
protection of people. They are designed for the control and plunder
of people, all done under the banner of supposedly accomplishing
some “good.”

When I was asked to speak at a conference in
Florida a few months ago, I noticed a parking sign in front of the
hotel that displayed the familiar handicapped logo above the words:
‘Parking by disabled permit only.” There was nothing noteworthy
about that, but what caught my eye was a second sign bolted below it
with the words: “$100 FINE”. It gave me a sick feeling in the pit of
my stomach. Although seemingly a minor thing, it was the epitome of
the collectivist ethic in which we live. Yes, there always will be a
few people who will not voluntarily honor a request to leave space
for the handicapped, but their number is exceedingly small. Even if
it were the other way around, even if most people would not honor
such a request, how destructive it is to our way-of-life to apply
the coercive power of the state to such areas of human choice. But
what really put the knot in my stomach was the realization that not
one person in a thousand has ever thought of the implications of
such laws. Collectivism is so entrenched in the world now, laws like
this are accepted without the slightest hesitation.

In any event, I took a photograph of the
sign with the thought that I might use it someday as an illustration
of how far we have deviated from the purely defensive concept of the
state. It remained on my computer for about six months but, as I was
archiving photos for permanent storage, it popped on screen and
demanded that I finally do something with it. So I made a copy and,
using graphics software, changed the “$100 FINE” part of the sign to
read “THANK YOU”. Side-by-side, this makes an excellent illustration
of one of the fundamental differences between collectivism and
individualism.

Which of these signs would you
prefer in your community?
If you choose the one on the left, you
are a collectivist.
If you choose the one on the right, you are
an individualist.

Back