-
National Law University Odisha
Science of Politics
I Dont Need State
Instructor:
Prof. Afroz Aalam
Submitted By:
Shreyansh Sharma (13BA044)
Deepankar Dixit (13BA012)
Kushagra Gupta (13BA022)
Shobhit Ahuja(13BA042)
-
Introduction
State has always been adulated by statists as the Supreme Being
in the Political World. Their
argument is that state is necessary and essential for the
survival of humanity, which without it
there will be chaos and conflict. Survival of the fittest will
prevail. They argue that state is the
only mechanism protecting the poor from the rich. The weaks
exploitation by the stronger
entity. They cannot fathom a world without a state: an entity
which demands absolute
obedience to its commands, and punishes severely those who do
not. In todays world,
disobeying the commands of a state is almost unthinkable, as any
derisive actions towards
state, invites serious contempt. Whats more is, it is a socially
acceptable phenomenon, as
people do not really know any other form of living in a society
other than under the coercion
of authorities.
By this research, we intend to explore the notion of a world
without a state. We will be
looking into the dysfunctions and discrepancies of a state, the
development (or regression) of
the ideals of freedom and free will in a world under
governmental authorities, and how to
develop alternative mechanisms to the classical idea of a state.
We will be analysing how the
state is strengthening as the world progresses and modernizes by
looking at recent
developments. We will try to judge by our findings whether a
world without state can really
exist or will that idea remain a chimera.
Our studies will be focused on sources already established as
authoritative, like reputed
research papers and other academic works such as books and
journals, as well as blog articles
and websites.
The questions we will try to address will span a wide spectrum;
such as how the existence of
a state is justified, the dysfunctional aspects of state that
have inadvertently manifested in the
real world, the disadvantages that having a state imposes on
personal freedom and individual
liberty, the various political ideologies which developed as a
result of the disillusionment of
various political scientists and philosophers from the statist
forms of governance.
Our hypothesis is that the state has failed in its objectives,
and has failed to develop itself as a
political organ that can be trusted with the responsibility for
regulation of lives of numerous
individuals that inhabit this planet. Instead of improving the
conditions of the world and
-
developing into an ideal system it was visualised to eventually
evolve into, it is deteriorating
and becoming more tyrannical by the day; the NSA global spying
operation and the recent
revolutions in many middle- eastern countries. As days pass us
by, the governments are
becoming more powerful and absolutist, more ruthless in
exercising the prerogatives they
have been attributed for the purpose of the welfare of its
people. We think the present
situation demands a limitation, or perhaps absolute abolition of
the powers of the state as that
would be more suitable to the development and progress of the
human race, and development
and implementation of other forms of associations and
voluntarily- constituted organisations
to substitute the present system.
What we are trying to do in our research paper is to try and
examine whether or not a state is
really needed for the sustainable development of humanity. And
through our research we
intend to try to come up with various alternate mechanisms which
can be established to
function more efficiently than the contemporary idea of the
state. We will try to come up with
the solutions to the problems we encounter in the course of the
research. We intend to
examine and scrutinize the various aspects of state, and study
it in a more critical light. As
even when you hold something sacred, academic study demands its
critical evaluation, as that
only is the medium through which we can debunk myths and see the
reality of the situation
and appreciate it.
-
1.Theoretical justification of having a State
1.1What is State?
The term can be used to refer to a bewildering range of things:
a collection of institutions, a
territorial unit, a historical entity, a philosophical idea and
so on.1 It is significant that though
some sort of political organization has existed since ancient
times , such as Greek city states
and the roman empire yet the concept of State is comparatively
modern and owes its origin to
Machiavelli who expressed this idea as power which as authority
over men.2 However there
is no accepted definition of State and it has been differently
defined by various writers from
time to time3. According to Aristotle The State is a union of
families and villages having for
its end perfect and self sufficient life. According to Prof.
Sigwick the State is a political
society or community, i.e. a body of human beings deriving its
corporate unity from the fact
that its members acknowledge permanent obedience to the same
government which
represents the society in any transaction that it may carry on
as a body with other political
societies4.
The view of Woodrow Wilson is that the State is a person
organized for law within a defined
territory. Bakunin writes the State is not society it is only a
historical form of it, as brutal as
it is abstract. It is born historically in all countries of
marriage of violence, rapine, pillage, in
a word, war and conquest, that the goods successively created by
theological fantasy of
nations . It has been from its origin and it remains still at
present the divine sanction of brutal
force and triumphant in force, it does not insinuate itself; it
does not seek to convert .Even
when it commands what is good it hinders and spoils it just
because it commands it.
Max Weber sought to evolve a sociological definition of a State
he wrote sociologically the
State cannot be defined in terms of its ends. Ultimately one can
define the modern State
sociologically only in terms of specific means peculiar to it,
as to every political association
namely the use of physical force.
1 Andrew Heywood,Political Theory An Introduction,75.
2 O.P. Gauba, An introduction to political theory, 132.
3 V.D. Mahajan, Politiccal theory, 133.
4 O.P. Gauba, An introduction to political theory,132.
-
1.2Conceptual Grounds To Justify State
(A).Theory of divine origin
It is the oldest theory regarding the origin of State.5
According to this theory the State is
established and governed by God himself or by some super human
power. 6God may rule the
State directly or in directly through some ruler who is regarded
as the agent of the god.
According to Mahabharat there was anarchy in the beginning of
the worlds and people prayed
the God to come to their rescue. It was under these
circumstances God appointed Manu to
rule over the people. The theory of divine right was used to
support the theory of the divine
right of king.7 James 1 king of England supported the theory of
divine right of kings in his
book the law of free Monarchies. His view was that kings were
kings because God had made
them kings and consequently they were responsible to God alone.
They were not responsible
to the people for their acts of omission and commission because
they were merely the agents
of God. Even if a king is wicked it means God has sent him as a
punishment for peoples sins
and it is unlawful to shake off the burden which god has laid
upon them. A bad king will be
judged by God but he must not be judged by his subjects or any
human agency for enforcing
the law such as the estates or the courts.8
(B).Theory of force
According to this theory the State was created by force. The
State is the result of subjugation
of the weaker by the stronger. It can also be said that war
begat the king. History tells us that
great empires were created by generals and war lords. Hume says
that it is probable that the
first ascendancy of one man over multitudes began during a State
of war, where the
superiority of courage and of genius discovers itself most
visibly.
The theory of force has been advocated from time to time by
different institutions and
individuals to serve their own ends. The individuals relied upon
the principle of survival of
the fittest and argued that it is only the strong who survive
and the weak go to the wall. The
view of Karl Marx was that the State was based on force and when
the classless society was
5 V.D. Mahajan, Political Theory, 249.
6V.D. Mahajan, Political Theory, 250.
7 Andrew Heywood, Political Theory An introduction, 85.
8 Andrew Heywood, Political Theory An introduction,86.
-
established it will wither away. The view of Herbert Spencer was
that the government is the
offspring of the evil bearing about it the marks of its
parentage.9
(C) Social contract theory
The social contract theory is not only the most ancient but also
the most famous of all the
theories regarding the origin of the State. 10
The substance of this theory is that the State is the
result of an agreement entered into by men who originally had no
governmental
organization11
. In the writings of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Rousseau the
theory of
social contract received systematic wide treatment.
Thomas Hobbes
According to Hobbes the human beings are by nature selfish,
quarrelsome, wicked,
competitive, coward, they run towards reward and escapes from
punishment. The motive of
gain and the wish to satisfy appetite and desires was the motive
behind all human action. Man
by nature was anything but social animal. He found nothing but
grief in the company of his
fellows12
. The state of nature was a state of war, war of each against
all. The life of man was
nasty, bruty, shorty.
The State of nature was ended by the people by entering into a
contract. Every man has said
to every other man I authorize and give up my rights of
governing myself to this man or
assembly of men on this condition that thou give up my right to
him and authorize all his
actions in like manner. It was in this way that the State came
into existence. In this contract
State was not a party to the contract but it was the product of
the contract. The people cannot
break the contract because it was based on the sentiment of
fear. The contract is eternally
binding because to break the terms of the contract is to slip
back into the insecure conditions
of the state of the state of nature from which the people had
contracted to escape.
John Locke
According to the philosophy of John Locke man by nature is
social, altruistic, peaceful,
helpful, rational, equal, he considered human beings as pretty
decent fellows far removed
from competitive, quarrelsome, and selfish creatures of Hobbes.
Locke believed in the
9 V.D. Mahajan, Political Theory, 251.
10 V.D. Mahajan, Political Theory, 134.
11 Andre Heywood ,Political Theory An Introduction,82.
12 O.P. Gauba, An introduction to political theory, 132.
-
goodness of human nature. He believes that men are capable of
self regulation. They are
rational and social.
According to Locke the individual can live in a moral way even
without the state. People
lived in the state of nature. The state of nature was not of war
but one of inconvenience. The
reason was that there was standing want of an established law.
The law of nature was given
individual interpretation by every individual so there is the
possibility that conflicts arise in
thus interpretation so there should be a third party to solve
this dispute. If there is no third
party then it would be against the principle of natural justice.
In this way State is created as a
third party to resolve the disputes.
Jean Jacques Rousseau
According to Rousseau man by nature is neither social nor anti
social, he is a political, a
social, a cultural. Man by nature is a noble savage. 13
He considered the state of nature as an
era of idyllic felicity. Reason did not guide the action of
individuals who were moved by
emotions. He wrote that man by nature never think and one who
thinks is a corrupt creature.
Every individual has unlimited liberty in the state of nature.
There was no private property,
no corruption, no jealously. He know neither right or wrong and
was away from all notions of
virtue and vice.
With the passage of time things changed in the state of nature.
The increase in population and
dawn of reason were the main reasons for this change14
. The people started thinking in terms
of mine and thine. Human beings has the capacity to improve so
the population starts
increasing there was limited number of resources and the people
starts innovating so they
start having pride of their innovation and this pride led to
competition. Thus appears the
difference of rich and poor. Life became intolerable.
Then by a social contract everyone surrendered to the community
all his rights and the result
was that the community became sovereign. The sovereign was
absolute. Even after the
contract the individual remained as free he was before. He says
since each gives himself up to
all he gives himself up to no one. Law was the expression of
general will.15
In this way a
sovereign was created to resolve the disputes.
13
O.P. Gauba, An Introduction To Political Theory, 211. 14
V.D. Mahajan, Political Theory,242. 15
Robert Taylor. Rousseau Social Contract
-
1.3Alternate Mechanism Of State
(A) Anarchism
The word anarchism is taken from Greek word anarchia which means
no rule.16
Florence
Ellioit defines anarchism as a political doctrine advocating the
abolition of organized
authority17
. Anarchists say that every government is evil and tyranny18
. They want free
association of individuals, without armed forces, courts,
prisons, or written laws. Anarchism
is a principle of life under which society is conceived without
government; harmony in such a
society is being obtained not by submission to law or any
authority but by free agreements
concluded between various groups. Anarchists believe that
political authority in any of its
forms is unnecessary and undesirable. Anarchism means opposition
to government based
upon force. It is opposed to the State as the embodiment of the
force employed in the
government of the community. Liberty is the supreme goal of
anarchist creed and liberty is
sought by the direct road of abolishing all forcible control
over the individual by the
community19
.
(B) Libertariainism
It is a philosophy that holds the liberty as a highest political
end. It mainly focuses on
individual liberty, voluntary association and political freedom.
The libertarians were in the
favor of giving limited rights to the state, they did not talk
about the complete abolition of
political government. Libertarian philosopher Roderick Long
defines libertarianism as "any
political position that advocates a radical redistribution of
power from the coercive state to
voluntary associations of free individuals", whether "voluntary
association" takes the form of
the free market or of communal cooperatives. Libertarian defend
the idea of minimal state
i.e. a state limited to the functions of protecting its citizens
against violence, theft and fraud
and to the enforcement of contracts.20
In a libertarian view it is not the ends of mans action
16
Murray N Rothbard. Anatomy of State 17
V.D. Mahajan, Political Theory, 728. 18
O.B. Gauba,An Introduction To Political Theory,442. 19
V.D.Mahajan, Political Theory,729. 20
Robert Nozick, Philosophy of Liberty
-
that count only the means used in serving that ends.
Libertarians represent a way of
achieving significant social change without resort to politics
or violent revolution.
(c) Marxian Philosophy on State
Marx said that the state is neither a natural institution nor an
ethical institution .21
According
to the Marx the state is nothing more than a machine for the
exploitation and oppression of
one class by another. The edifice of state is rooted in class
war. The state is not a natural
institution. He considers state as an instrument of
violence22
. The dominant class employs
every instrument to exploit and suppress the dependent class.
The military, police, courts,
law, etc. are employed to use violence and force for the good of
the dominant class. He
considered the state a temporary institution, after the
overthrow of the bourgeoise the state
will have a quasi character.
The Marxian theory of state denounces the democratic character
of authority and wants to
substitute it with a new type of democracy called peoples
democracy.
2.Is The State going Through the Phase of Legitimacy Crisis
It has been said that human society can neither be well ordered
nor prosperous unless it has
some people invested with legitimate authority to preserve its
institutions and devote
themselves as far as necessary to work for the good of all. The
founding fathers held the view
that government derives its power from the people and it should
be limited by the rights of
the individual23
. The purpose of the government was to maintain law and order,
protection
and promotion of well being of its citizens. It is based on the
principle of equality of
opportunity, equitable distribution of wealth and public
responsibility for those who are
unable to avail themselves of the minimal provisions of good
life24
and all the tasks which are
taken by government nothing is more important than economic
growth25
. The state is
universally considered as an institution of social
service.26
It is regarded as necessary means
for achieving the goals of a mankind.
21
V.D.Mahajan, Political Theory,172. 22
Andrew Heywood, Political Theory An Introduction,87. 23
Edvard Younkins. Individual Happiness And Minimal State 24
Wikipedia.Welfare state 25
Doug Bandow. The Role Of Government Promoting Development 26
Murray N Rothbard. Anatomy of State
-
As Bertrand De Journal has sagely pointed out, through the
centuries men have formed
concepts designed to check and limit the exercise of State rule
and one after another State
uses his intellectual rubber stamps of legitimacy and virtue to
attach to its decree and
actions.27
In Western Europe the concept of divine sovereignty held that
the kinks may rule
according to divine law but the kings turned the concept into
rubber stamp of divine approval
of an action of the king. Now if we look at present scenario
parliament is considered as an
essential element of the State and its every act is considered
as totally sovereign.
It is also said that Constitution was designed with checks and
balances to limit any one
governmental power and yet had then develop a supreme court with
the monopoly of
ultimately interpreting power.28
The role of State is to maintain law and order, providing
education, removing poverty but in present scenario what the
State is doing is altogether
different State is curtailing the individual freedom oin every
sphere of life whether it is
education, economic interest or what so ever. The purpose of the
State is not to help people
either materially or spiritually to pursue their vision of
happiness, the proper function of the
State is no more than to provide peoople with the preconditions
for their own happiness
pursuing activities.29
A legitimacy crisis is widely perceived to exist on the basis of
polls of public attitudes
reflecting a precipitous decline in societal leadership,
increasing manifestations of illegal,
anti-social and repressive behavior of policies, and the
structural failure of the State to
respond to fundamental human needs.30
If we look at present conditions it is commonly said
that our society is experiencing a crisis of legitimacy. Now the
question arises what is crisis?
According to sociology the crisis is a turning point often
brought by convergence of events
which create new circumstances threatening establishing goals
and requiring action.
The legitimacy crisis is evident in public attitudes which are
expressed in a variety of
contexts and most systematically in polls. There is a massive
shift towards major political
institutions which is characterized by the dissipation of
confidence and the emergence of
diffuse political cynicism; it also includes a perception of
selfishness and corruption among
the leadership.
27
Murray N Rothbard. Anatomy Of State 28
Murray N Rothbard. Anatomy Of State 29
Edvard Younkins. Individual happiness and minimal state 30
David O Firedrichs. The Legitimacy Crisis In The United States:
A Conceptual Analysis. Sociology Of Political Knowledge (1980)
:540-555.
-
Further if we look at the behavior of people they are doing
activities such as riots, protest, the
rising crime rate these may be taken as symptoms and
consequences of legitimacy crisis.
Now look at the behavior of political leadership it represents
the established policies of
repression and dissatisfaction.
The existence of legitimacy crisis is widely claimed, this
crisis is essential perceptual but also
has a behavioral and structural roots. It may be attributed to
the conditions of a modern mass
society or to the impact of specific events, leaders and
controversies. There has been a slow
but steady erosion in the protection of constitution provides
its citizen against arbitrary power
of government. We need to reaffirm the spiritual and political
wisdom of our founding fathers
and return to government that is limited to establishing and to
enforcing the standards of just
conduct.
-
INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM BEING CURTAILED BY THE
INSTITUTIONS
Hobbes is truly putting forth not only two sorts of freedom,
common and civil, yet two ideas
of emancipation, outer and inner. His meaning of regular freedom
is to the extent that idea as
a thoughtful contention. What he needs to show is the means by
which awful the state of
nature is when we every have the outer freedom to do however we
see fit31
. When we enter
social order we surrender this emancipation; we are less free
yet better for it.32
At the same
time to maintain this refinement, Hobbes needed to contend that
things other than outside
impediments restrain liberty as well as force, since laws are
not physical obstacles.33
Thus, his dialogue of the freedom of subjects is a critical move
from his examination of
characteristic liberty.34
There is no contrast in guideline between the sovereign's sword
and
the bandit's weapon, yet Hobbes wishes to say that the dread of
one abandons us free and the
different does not.35
It is currently states of brain (interior legitimate ties of the
executor),
which influence freedom as well as outside obstructions, and
subsequently fear is no more
extended perfect with freedom. Hobbes should attempt to cover
this change of position,
generally the entire thought of agreement through trepidation
loses its genuineness; as he says
more than once, an automatic contract is not quality.36
31
Barry, Brian. 1972. "Warrenderand His Critics." In Hobbes and
Rousseau: A Collection of Critical Essayed.
Maurice Cranston and Richards. Peters.New York: Anchor
32 Karatnycky, A. (Summer 2000). The State of Democracy: 2000.
American Educator, 24 (2)
33 Hobbes's Theories of FreedomAuthor(s): David van MillSource:
The Journal of Politics, Vol. 57, No. 2
(May, 1995), pp. 443-459
34
http://faculty.education.illinois.edu/burbules/papers/critical.html
35 Liberty, Rights, and Will in Hobbes: A Response to David Van
Mill John D. Harman.
36 Supra note. 2
-
One contemporary example is, The parliament of Uganda yesterday
passed the disputable
Public Order Management Bill (POMB) of 2011 which is likewise
generally regarded as the
"Anti-Demo Draft Law. The bill looks to manage open gatherings,
define the callings and
obligations of the Police and the coordinators and members
throughout open gatherings, and
in addition endorse measures for defending open request. 37
This bill when marked by the
president of Uganda will be law and it stipulates that an
assembling of three or more
individuals will be illegal. 38
A research by the united nation explained, Research recently
conducted by the Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights in the Middle East has shown
that although the
constitutions of the majority of Middle Eastern countries
provide for freedom of expression,
in reality conventional and international (including radio,
satellite TV and the Internet) media
remain under a restricted and intimidatory legal, political and
security environment. 39
GLOBALIZATION AND THE IDENETITY OF THE STATE
Globalization is construed by the KOF40
score. Globalization can be deciphered by two
criterions:
The KOF index defines economic globalization as long distance
flows of goods, capital
and services as well as information and perceptions that
accompany market exchanges.41
Globalization is often thought of solely as an economic process:
The globalization of
finance, demand, supply, and competition form a series of
interlocking currents of global
circulation of information.42
Political Globalization
37
J. S. Mill, On Liberty, chapter i: p. 226 in Collected Works of
John Stuart Mill, ed. J. M. Robson
(Toronto/London, 1981- ), vol. 18
38
http://faruganda.wordpress.com/2013/08/07/bill-to-curtail-freedom-of-assembly-passed-public-order-
management-bill/ 39
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/FreedomofthePressintheMiddleEast.aspx
40 The Kearney index has four dimensions, Economic, Political,
Personal and Technology, but Personal and
Technology are best viewed in combination to better compare with
the equivalent measures of social in
the other two indices.
41 KOF
http://globalization.kof.ethz.ch/static/pdf/method_2010.pdf
42 Nederveen Pieterse, J. (2009) p.9
-
Political globalization accounts for 25% of a countrys overall
KOF score. It is measured in
the KOF Index by recording the number of embassies in country,
membership in international
organizations, participation in UN Security Council Missions and
the number of international
treaties signed by the country since 1945.
Social Globalization
Manfred Steger notes that globalization is also a linguistic and
ideological practice43, as
opposed to finding globalization as merely a set of material
processes anchored in
economics and technology. It is also reflected in conflicting
systems of ideas and claims...that
define, describe, and evaluate the process44
. Ideas spread through social contacts. The KOF
index defines social globalization as the spread of ideas,
information, images, and people.45
Social globalization index scores add up to 38% of overall
globalization score and take into
account measures that include, tourists, phone calls, internet
users, trade in books and
newspapers, international mail, and also includes the per capita
number of IKEA stores and
McDonalds restaurants.46 While one can measure directly the cost
of a Big Mac in these
countries and count how many are purchased, there is the shared
universal experience of
eating at a McDonalds that is harder to both qualify and
quantify as a driver of
globalization.47
Likewise, does one purchase a coffee table at IKEA because the
prices are so
reasonable, or does having Swedish furniture make one feel more
cosmopolitan?
state contracting and the decrease of official regulation figure
out the genuine abolishment of
the existing controls for the free development of persons,
merchandise, administrations and
capital. As Scholte says, people in general part should arrive
at a finish in arranging the
powers of the business in worldwide setting". 48
Also, as per Martin Carnoy and Manuel
Castells, the precise wellspring of globalization has been
spoken to by the a free market
system rebuilding process both of the state and companies
intended to conquer the mid
43
Steger, M. (2009) p.18
44 Steger, M. (2009) p.ix
45 KOF
http://globalization.kof.ethz.ch/static/pdf/method_2010.pdf
46 Supra note 11.
47 Ibid.
48 Scholte, J. A. 1993. International Relations of Social
Change. Buckingham: Open University Press.
-
1970's emergency.49
This change was significantly liberal in nature:
"deregulation,
liberalization, and privatization, both locally, and globally
were the institutional foundation
that made ready for new business procedures with the
worldwide
Then again, at the worldwide level, globalization speaks to or
makes the essential conditions
for the signs of a few substances which disintegrate the
universal part of the state as the
single global on-screen character.50
This implies that globalization is connected with an
administration of sway as an aftereffect of the rise of some
"new and powerful manifestations
of non- regional financial and political association in the
worldwide field, comparable to
multinational enterprises, transnational social developments,
global administrative offices,
and so on."51
. As such, worldwide and transnational associations and
developments rival the
state52
, creating an emergency of state power; in this way,
unwaveringness is exchanged from
the state or social order to the easier or more elevated amount
units 53
. Provided that
globalization is a methodology, and some of its principle
outcomes might be investigated at
the state level, then, the state itself could be examined from
the processual point of view. The
postmodern state is no more extended dependent upon the
equalization of force framework
and no more extended underlines the vitality of sway or an
acceptable division between
domesticated and outside legislative issues . 54
The postmodern state is a result of
globalization and is one of the performing artists populating
the space of "postinternational
legislative issues" .
Today, globalization cutoff points state power and in the
meantime redefine its social fringes.
Provided that the established country state suggests the
presence of a national group as a
referent, then globalization constrains the state to adjust this
edge of reference, national
neighborhoods lose their political representation channel and
the following move is spoken to
49 Scholte, J. A. 2000. Globalization. A Critical Introduction.
London: Palgrave.
50 Ibid.
51 Smith, D. 2006. Globalization. The Hidden Agenda. Cambridge:
Polity Press.
52 Ibid.
53 Rodrick, D. 1997. Has Globalization Gone Too Far? Washington
D.C.: Institute for International Economics.
54 Sassen, S. 1996. Losing Control? Sovereignty in an Age of
Globalization. New York: Columbia University
Press.
-
by the advancement of patriotism against the state.55
Hence, as a regular advancement of the
state "the detachment between country and the state is a crucial
process normal for our
chance".56
Without summing this up detachment, we should underline the way
that the state
loses its qualities offered by innovation.57
The worldwide economy and the enlightening
insurgency have genuinely reconfigured the central foundations
of the legislating courses of
action curious to the cutting edge state and therefore they
adjusted two of the focal
characteristics of the current state: sway and region.
In this new force topography, globalization infers no less than
"a halfway denationalizing of
national domain and an incomplete movement of a few segments of
state sway to different
establishments, from supranational substances to the worldwide
capital business" (Sassen
1996: 146). At the end of the day, power and region are moved in
other institutional stadiums
outside the state and outside the customary domain system, sway
being decentralized and
domain somewhat denationalized. As a consequence of such changes
the country state ends
up compelled on one hand by the worldwide market constrains, and
then again by the
political objectives of the force shift. Hence, if the business
strengths denationalize the
region, the force movement is made setting power in a mixture of
institutional enclosures of
the transnational (legitimate) administrations.
In this age, globalization must be comprehended acknowledging
the redefinition of the force
relations. In the first place, country states have practically
come to be parts of a vaster
example of worldwide progressions and, second, the thought of
worldwide governmental
issues underlines the intricacy of the interpenetrations that
transcend states and social orders,
adding to them an extensive system of organizations and
associations. Inside such a
revolutionary connection the unoriginality of these
collaborations may be examined through
the viewpoint which reflects the increase of the worldwide and
local captivating examples.
55
Adam Ferguson, Principles of Moral and Political Science, New
York & London: Garland Publishing, 1978, vol. II, p. 208 56
Modelski, G. 2008. Globalizations as Evolutionary Process. In:
Modelski, G, Tessaleno D. and Thompson, W. R., eds. Globalization
as Evolutionary Process. Modeling Global Change. London:
Routledge.
57 Supra note 24.
-
Demerits of State and Contemporary Government:
Most people concur that government as a whole is incompetent,
dishonest and disruptive, and
that politicians are liars and unreliable, but they do not
attribute any ethical failings to it.
When something clearly bad happens, the defence is "they were
just doing their job" is trotted
out. While people are against government, they consider it as a
"necessary wrong." They
point to all the "good deeds" that government does, like
constructing roads, schools and
vaccination programs, and ignore them, "bad deeds" that
government promotes, like war,
genocide, Drugs, and jailing innocents on the basis of a
Monopoloid58
and bankrupt
principles of justice.
Certainly the individuals who work for any given government are
not wicked in and of
themselves. They may commit wrong actions as part of their work,
but they themselves may
be very nice people who wouldn't otherwise think of throbbing
another person, and, insofar
as the moral aspect is concerned, probably don't understand what
it is exactly that they are
doing. Despite the fact that they support a system that hurts
and takes away the freedom of
millions of people on a daily basis, it is not the individuals
that we call wrong when we say
"government is wrong." We are, rather, talking about the concept
of government and the
belief in government.
Granted, people have varying ideas on which ethics2 one should
use to judge actions, and
what is or is not wrong. But even with that in mind, the vast
majority of people agree on
some basic ethical principles such as:
1. Killing people without provocation is wrong.
2. Stealing from people is wrong59
.
3. Taking away people's freedom is wrong60
.
There are some exceptions to these principles. Some persons
think that the death penalty is
morally permissible since the individual being killed is a
criminal and consequently has
58
"Monopoloid" is the adjective of "monopoly." A monopoly holds,
by definition, a Monopoloid control over an area. 59
Through so called Taxes. 60
Rudal Shah v. State of Bihar. SC. 1983.
-
forfeited his privileges as an individual. Many people would
also be sensitive to a person who
steals out of urgent need. But apart from these particular
cases, the vast majority of people
would agree to principles 1 to 3 above. Any system which is
premised on61
, and maintained
by, the constant violation of these points is also visibly wrong
in nature. For instance, a union
of serial killers doesnt matter how much "good conduct" they
perform, would be wrong
because it is based on, and maintained by, a violation of
principle 1. The association cannot
breathe without some persons killing other persons, because that
is exactly what serial killers
do.
On the other hand, in malpractice cases, a doctor may by mistake
kill a patient through
negligence, but we do not call him evil. At worst, we would call
him incompetent. The
distinction between both cases is that, in the case of the
killers, violating the principles of
morals listed is a systemic62
attribute, while the case of doctors is not.
Freedom is one of the most important aspects of the society
which is being violated by the
state as happened in the well known case of Rudal Shah v. State
of Bihar63
.
Some of the activities of the government:
War
The dual purpose of war: to boost government's tax base by
dominating more land, and to rise
its supremacy base at home. During each and every war in the
past you can view a
tremendous expansion of government. Budgets are inflated at an
enormous speed, war
profiteers64
make their fortunes, and the normal person loses a deal of money
and freedom.
Insurgents and soldiers execute these strategies using deadly
force. Sometimes, they slaughter
civilians in order to inflict terror65
. The Iraq war claimed more than 116000 civilian lives66
. It
seems that the only dissimilarity between war and murder is
scale. War cannot exist without
61
Premised on: Using as a basis for justification or
argumentation, assuming something as true or taking it for
granted. 62
Systemic: Common to a system, integrated within the features of
a system. 63
Rudal Shah v. State of Bihar. SC. 1983. 64
Such as military-industrial complex. 65
As done by American soldiers in Iraq. 66
David
Blair,Iraq-war-10-years-on-at-least-116000-civilians-killed, The
Telegraph, 15 March 2013.
-
government. Only a government can focus, by slander or force,
all the money and manpower
to wage war. The price tag of the wars in Afghan and Iraq could
reach as high as 6 trillion
dollars or $75,000 for every house in America67. The 2003
invasion of Iraq has become the
largest longest and most costly use of armed force by
U.S.68.
Price tag of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars69
(billions of dollars)
If war is unwanted and wrong, then government must be indicted
as permitting this evil to
exist.
All this organizing of war is not a natural but a very
complicated process. Particularly in
contemporary nations70
, it could never survive without the State.
The other classes, left to them, have too many necessities and
interests and ambitions, to
concern themselves with so expensive and destructive game.71
67
New calculations suggest economic cost of Iraq war much larger
than previously recognized, Harvard Gazette, January 8, 2005. 68
Daniel Liberfeld, Theories of Conflict and Iraq War, International
Journal of Peace Studies, Vol. 10, No. 2 (Autumn/Winter 2005) (pp.
1-21) 69
Source: For 2001 to 2008 from Centre for Arms Control and
Non-Proliferation, armscontrolcenter.org; for 2009, the Budget
includes $70 billion in allowances for GWOT; WRL estimates an
additional $130 billion will be authorized for spending in 2009 and
subsequent years, making the total authorized $200 billion. This
graph shows Budget Authority, while the pie on the front is
Outlays. 70
Like United States of America, Iraq and India. 71
By Randolph Bourne.
-
Taxation
"That part of the revenues of a state which is obtained by the
compulsory dues and charges
upon its subjects."72
Is there anyone who wants to pay taxes? Hell no. its no secret
that nearly everyone don't like
to pay taxes Taxation is involuntary. We do not choose to pay
the government and give them
our wealth: they claim it from us on the basis of where we
reside, and if we refuse to give,
they use laws and armaments against us. No other institution
uses such hard-core tactics. A
continuation of the present plan is little short of downright
robbery73
.
The exact definition of extortion, The use, or the express or
implicit threat of the use, of
violence or other criminal means to cause harm to person,
reputation, or property as a means
to obtain property from someone else with his consent.74
Supporters of taxation generally emphasize that no such rights
are injured. They argue that
"theft" must be measured in the background of the system of
government in place.75
"Just as no one is morally required to answer a robber
truthfully when he asks if there are
any valuables in ones house, so no one can be morally required
to answer truthfully similar
questions asked by the State, e.g., when filling out income tax
returns."76
If you refuse to pay your taxes, if you do not consent to the
government's claim over you,
then the government may perform armed raids on your property,
and will threaten you with
harm to your property through politely-worded letters. Taxation,
therefore, seems to fit the
definition of extortion approved by the government itself.
The reality is that the government is like a person, says to a
man: 'Your money, or your life.'
And most, taxes are paid under the force of arms. The government
does not, indeed, spring
upon him from the pavement and pointing a pistol to his head,
proceed to rifle his pockets.
But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and
it is far more dastardly and
72
The Encyclopaedia Britannica. 73 Legalised Robbery, the Los
Angeles Times, P. National Tax Association. 74
United States Code, Title 18. 75
Anthony E. Parent. "Is the income tax theft?" 76
Murray N. Rothbard. "The Moral Status Of Relations To The State,
chapter 24 of The Ethics of Liberty (ISBN 0-8147-7506-3 Humanities
Press 1982, New York University Press 1998).
-
shameful.77
Advocates of taxation say that your tax money goes to noble
purposes and that you should be
glad to give in some of your income. But the bitter truth is
more than half of income tax
revenues go to military purposes. Taxation is the way by which
government centralizes funds
to wage war. Have a look at where your money actually goes.
Total Budget (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion
NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion
78
If I go around with a gun telling people to surrender part of
their earnings for the purposes
which I consider as noble, I would be searching for an eminent
lawyer. Extortion is wrong,
and stealing is wrong. Since government cannot breathe without
taxation, government is evil.
State courts and police:
The courts and police are universally hailed as essential
functions of government. And yet,
for the most part of the history of civilization, they have been
outside of the jurisdiction of
government.
The government gains a great deal by doing so. What government
gains is the freedom to
impose new, wrong laws on people. Laws that allows crimes when
done by government such
as taxation, drafts, taking over whole areas of society and laws
that outlaw victimless actions
when done by individuals.
The State's behaviour is violence, and it calls its violence
"law"; that of the individual,
crime.79
77
Lysander Spooner 78
Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009,
Analytical Perspectives (2010). 79
By Max Sterner.
-
All contemporary governments have taken over the courts and
police in order to enforce their
dominance on society. If taking away our freedom to choose the
way we want to live, is
unacceptable, then government is also unacceptable.
Infrastructure:
Generally, we think that: "we need government to build roads, to
run schools and to stop
crime."
The first thing to keep in mind here is that "government" does
not construct roads, run
schools, or stop criminals. Individuals do. And they can do that
not considering of who they
work for. Private bridges and roads get built, private security
and police forces also stop
criminals and private schools also run. The disparity is that
government is a monopoly;
monopolies are not good for consumers as well as for society.
Wherever there is a monopoly,
people have less choice, pay twice and get worse service, and
everyday stories of corruption
in newspapers.
Corruption:
Though it is not a function of a state but, they do more than
what they are being paid for.
Corruption refers to the exercise of public power for private
gain. Corruption is government,
whereby a public employ, elected or not, uses his or her
position in order to obtain
benefits.80
The U.S. Government Deception
The pie chart under is the government view of the budget. This
is a misrepresentation of how income taxes are spent by the U.S.
government.
81
80 Alvaro Cuervo-Cazurra, who cares about corruption?, Palgrave
Macmillan Journals, Vol. 37, No. 6, Nov., 2006 81
Source: Congressional Budget Office for FY2008
-
The chart depicts the evil of the government. How it
misrepresents the fact that only 20% of
funds were used in wars which in reality was 54%.
Some examples from India,
Scandals in India
Scandal Name Year INR
crore Location Persons involved Summary
2012 Indian coal
mining scam 2012 185591.34 nation
Comptroller and Auditor General of India,
the coal ministry, many electricity boards
and private companies
coal blocks allotted, not auctioned, leading
to estimated losses as per the Comptroller
and Auditor General of India.82
Karnataka Wakf
Board Land
Scam8384
2012 200000 Karnataka
Uttar Pradesh
NRHM scam8586 2012 10000
Uttar
Pradesh87 Mayawati88
2G Spectrum
Case89 2010 17600090 national
Nira Radia, A. Raja, M. K. Kanimozhi,
many telecommunications companies
communication bandwidth auctioned for
lower than market value
Uttar Pradesh food
grain case91 2003 35,000 Uttar Pradesh Akhilesh Yadav92,
Mayawati93
Food which the government purchased for
poor was instead sold on the open market.
All the great governments of the world... have been mere bands
of robbers, who have
associated for purposes of plunder, conquest, and the
enslavement of their fellow men. And
their laws, as they have called them, have been only such
agreements as they have found it
necessary to enter into, in order to maintain their
organizations, and act together in plundering
and enslaving others, and in securing to each his agreed share
of the spoils.94
82
"CAG estimates: Our likely loss Rs 38,00,00,00,00,000".
Hindustan Times. 17 August 2012. 83
"Now, Rs 2 crore Wakf land scam in Karnataka". Zee News. 27
March 2012. 84
"Wakf Board land scam: Rs 2 crore scam surfaces in Karnataka".
IBN Live. 27 March 2012. 85
"NRHM scam: 6 officials booked in accountant's murder". DNA.
86
"NRHM scam: 2 former UP ministers to appear before CBI". The
Indian Express. 26 December 2011. 87
"NRHM scam: CBI arrests three in Uttar Pradesh". The Hindu, 6
January 2012. 88
"Mayawati misused funds for rural health: PM". Express Buzz.
89
"CAG's Report". CAG Report, 2013-09-25. 90
"2G case: Loss of Rs 30984 cr due to govt policy". The Economic
Times. Retrieved 2013-09-25. 91
"UP Akhilesh govt faces Rs35,000-crore food grain scam heat".
India Today. 92
"UP Akhilesh govt faces Rs35,000-crore food grain scam heat".
India Today. 93
"Massive food grain scam in Maya's UP". Zee News. 94
By Lysander Spooner.
-
Developing Alternate Mechanisms to the
Contemporary State
According to Anarchists, Libertarians and other adherents of
ideologies advocating no/
limited state, contemporary state has been a deterrent in the
wholesome progressive
development of humanity as a whole, as, according to their
argument, the states practices
and policies are going in a direction diametrically opposite to
what they were meant to be. As
state intervention in more and more spheres of human life
increases, the interests of a
common person are forced into the background to make way for
ever-strengthening, giant
corporate, capitalist forces and established political forces
interests. There are certain natural
rights all human beings are born with which cannot be
transgressed by any authority. The
contemporary state has not been taking this in consideration and
its policies have perverted to
an extent where the very argument of the statists that State is
an ethical institution is being
questioned by the liberal political ideologists. Case in point:
the NSA surveillance of the
internet users from major portions of the world.95
This brings up several questions: How
much power should we grant a State to exercise? Is the very
existence of State a roadblock in
the way of getting an ideal system to govern ourselves? How do
we check such incidents
from ever happening? Are there any alternate mechanisms to
remedy these problems and
have better and more efficient structures for governance which
give due importance to the up
keeping of natural rights of human beings? How do we check the
misappropriation and
misdistribution of resources to ensure that we have a just
society where everyone has equal
opportunities and there is minimal conflict? The answering of
these questions is of pivotal
importance if we are to come up with any significant solutions
to the current crisis we face,
and to make this world a better place, the place it was meant to
be. The world that was
promised to us by the zealots of statism and democracy is not
visible anywhere on the
horizon. What we see is a totalitarian state intruding in every
sphere of life, curbing the
individual freedoms and free will of its citizens, and enforcing
dogmatic laws and rules in the
name of maintaining peace, law and order and promising
prosperity while supporting and
maintaining the instruments of exploitation. The only way to
avoid this situation is to act
95
http://www.allgov.com/news/controversies/nsa-collects-and-stores-web-history-of-millions-of-users-creates-profiles-of-us-citizens-131002?news=851284
-
now, contemplating on the best options we have, and treading
carefully as to avoid the
mistakes of the past. We dont need more power and domination to
have a better system of
governance. What we need is a more co-operative society, without
hierarchies, in all spheres
of life, whether they are social, political or economic.96
96
Susan Brown,[The Politics of Individualism], p 106.
-
Anarchism
Ever reviled, accursed neer understood,
Thou art the grisly terror of our age.
Wreck of all order, cry the multitude,
Art thou, and war and murders endless rage.
O, let them cry. To them that neer have striven
The truth that lies behind a word to find,
To them the words right meaning was not given.
They shall continue blind among the blind. But thou, O word, so
clear, so strong, so pure,
Thou sayeth all which I for goal have taken.
I give thee to the future! Thine secure
When each at least unto himself shall waken.
Comes it in sunshine? In the tempests thrill?
I cannot tell- but it the earth shall see!
I am an Anarchist! Wherefore I will
Not rule, and also ruled I will not be!
- John Henry Mackay
These words by the great Anarchist writer and thinker John Henry
Mackay convey the
misconceptions people have about Anarchism, and the confidence
he has in the anarchist
ideology quite strikingly. The word Anarchy has to it so many
derogatory connotations
associated by the statist indoctrination people usually go
through due to their living in a
statist world. They take it to mean a complete absence of order,
chaos and the reversion back
to primal, olden periods when the world was ruled by the
principles of might is right and
survival of the fittest. The Anarchist historian George
Woodcocks words are suited for their
-
sole appropriateness in this situation, "Of the more frivolous
is the idea that the anarchist is a
man who throws bombs and wishes to wreak society by violence and
terror. That this charge
should be brought against anarchists now, at a time when they
are the few people who are not
throwing bombs or assisting bomb throwers, shows a curious
purblindness among its
champions." The idea that anarchism has only meanings of chaos
and violence was rebutted
long ago by Alexander Berkman when he wrote: I must tell you,
first of all, what anarchism
is not. It is not bombs, disorder, or chaos. It is not robbery
or murder. It is not a war of each
against all. It is not a return to barbarianism or to the wild
state of man. Anarchism is the very
opposite of all that. 97
The Anarchist argument against the state is that it is not the
instinct of association that
gives birth to a state, but the instinct of domination.98
Anarchists are against the popular view
that power is the driving force behind the working of the social
world. They consider the use
of power to control another human being, who has the same rights
and entitlements as every
other human being, as immoral and illegitimate. The freedom of
an individual to make his
own life decisions without the states coercion is of utmost
importance. According to Peter
Kropotkin, human beings fall into basically two
categories.99
There are those of the view that
formal institutions and compulsion and force are required to
maintain order in the society.
Another type of people are those of the view that compulsion in
the form of state is not
necessary to maintain peace and order in the society, which can
be achieved by self-discipline
and mutual help and cooperation. For an Anarchist, authority
only means power of coercion
of one person over another.100 An Anarchist advocates the shift
of focus from power to
liberty. After all, the ultimate goal that we as humans seek to
achieve is that of ultimate
freedom.
A misconception about the Anarchist thought is that it advocates
total abolition of all social
structures and organisations. This misconception gives birth to
the stereotype that Anarchism
is all about the collapse of all order in society. When in
reality many Anarchists accept the
necessity of having social organisations to carry further
specific goals. However, these
organisations have to be formed out of their free will and not
be imposed on them.101
For an
Anarchist, freedom is not simply a total absence of constraints;
it entails responsibility,
97
http://hans-david.blogspot.in/2011/03/defining-anarchism-by-jason-justice.html
98
Bertrand de Jouvenel, On Power (Boston : Beacon Press, 1962), p.
99. 99
Peter Kropotkin, The State: Its Historic Role (London: Freedom
Press, 1946), p. 44. 100
Albert Weisbord, The Conquest of Power, I (New York, Covici
Friede, Publishers, 1947), 235. 101
Colin Ward, Anarchism as a Theory of Organization, Anarchy, LXII
(April 1966)
-
choice and free and voluntary assumption of social duties and
obligations.102
However,
Anarchists fully understand and know that power ultimately leads
to corruption and thus
should never be wielded, especially over fellow human beings.
Rather, they believe in a
gradual revolution against all forms of injustice, coercion and
misuse of power to establish an
Anarchist society.
Liberalism
According to John Hespers, liberalism is a philosophy of
personal liberty- the liberty of each
person to live according to his own choices, provided that he
does not attempt to coerce
others and thus prevent them from living according to their
choices.103 Basically,
libertarians hold liberty, equality and humanitarianism as their
primary ideals. And for liberty
to be exemplified in a society, only minimal government is
needed according to the
libertarians, as more government usually means interference with
personal rights and
privileges.
In a libertarian society, every act and action needs to be done
voluntarily. No fixed definition
of liberalism can be given except that it favours individual
rights and liberties over other
things. Liberalism is based on the belief that human beings are
valuable and have great
potential to do well. It advocates the freedom of an individual
without any restrictions unless
the individuals freedom infringes on anothers.104 Increasing an
individuals liberty and
freedom in all spheres, whether it be social, economic or
political, is one of the major
principles of liberalism.105
As William Beveridge said: Liberty means more than freedom
from the arbitrary power of Governments. It means freedom from
economic servitude to
Want and Squalor and other social evils; it means freedom from
arbitrary power in any form.
A starving man is not free, because till he is fed, he cannot
have a thought for anything but
how to meet his urgent physical needs; he is reduced from a man
to an animal. A man who
102
George Molnar, Conflicting Strains in Anarchist Thought,
Anarchy, IV (June, 1961), 121. 103
John Hospers, Libertarianism (Los Angeles, 1971), p. 5. 104
Ramsay Muir, Liberal Party (Encyclopedia Britannica)Vol. 15
105
L.T. Hobhouse, Liberalism (New York: Henry, Holt and Co.,
1911)
-
dare not resent what he feels to be an injustice from an
employer or a foreman, lest they
condemn him to chronic unemployment, is not free.106
Liberalism favours scientific inquiry and freedom of thought to
achieve its goals. It
advocates the bringing about of such a society not through
bloody struggles,107
but through
gradual changes and improvements. Liberalism is not rigid in the
sense that it does not
believe that there is only one path to achieving liberty and
equality of opportunity.108
Socialism
Socialism developed as an antithesis to liberalism, in the sense
that while liberalism focused
on individual liberty and freedom, socialism focused on the
collective identity of a society,
and emphasised on achieving designated goals through mutual
cooperation.109
The Marxist
view is that as capitalism becomes more and more outmoded and
thus results in the alienation
of the working class from the modes of production. This would
lead to the development of a
class consciousness.110
This would lead to class struggle and eventually the capitalist
class
will be overthrown. An egalitarian society will be established
and the government which
supported such an exploitative system as capitalism would
gradually wither away. A new
system of community governance will be formed which may be
called socialism. It is of the
view that humans are essentially social animals and it is in
their nature to cooperate and work
together.
Marxism is of the view that it is impossible to isolate matter
and thought. The theory of
surplus value is of great importance to the socialist economics.
In a capitalist world, the only
element responsible for production of goods and services,
labour, has its value determined by
the market conditions. Here, as workers increase in number,
their wage-values decrease and
106
Sir William Beveridge, Why I Am A Liberal (London: Herbert
Jenkins, Limited, 1945), p.9. 107
Morris R. Cohen, The Faith of a Liberal(New York: Henry Holt and
Co., 1946). 108
John Dewey, Liberalism and Social Action (New York: G.P. Putnam
and Sons, 1935) 109
Marvin Perry, Myrna Chase, Margaret Jacob, James R. Jacob.
Western Civilization: Ideas, Politics, and Society From 1600,
Volume 2. Ninth Edition. Boston, Massachusetts, USA: Houghton
Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company, 2009. p. 540. 110
Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First Century, 2003, by
Gregory and Stuart. p. 62, Marx's Theory of Change.
-
their lives grow more miserable as their exploitation by the
capitalists increase.111
Its basic
mission is the emancipation of land and industrial capital from
different forms of private
ownership, and entrusting them to the community as a
whole.112
This redistribution of
resources will eventually lead to the formation of an
egalitarian society where everyone has
equal opportunities.
111
O.P. Gauba, An Introduction to Political Theory(Macmillan
Publishers India Ltd., 2010) 112
O.P. Gauba, An Introduction to Political Theory(Macmillan
Publishers India Ltd., 2010)
-
Conclusion
Through this research, we come to the conclusion that the state
as an ideal has not manifested
itself as gracefully in pragmatics. It has mutated into
something very different than what it
was supposed to be. Its purpose remains unfulfilled, and its
return to the path of welfare and
good administration rendered impossible. The tyrannical monster
that the state has become, it
needs to be controlled, or slayed outright. We see in our
findings how state is a deeply flawed
and corrupt institution. We see how it prioritises war and
conflict to a ridiculous extent,
shifting its focus from more important aspects instead, like the
nutrition and prosperity of its
people. We also see how the law sometimes runs contrary to
justice, and how the instruments
of state (police, courts, etc.) are corruptible and can be used
to exploit and extort the very
people they are sworn to protect and serve. The state, we find,
is becoming the single most
intimidating looming threat on the horizon against individual
freedom, liberty and rights. It is
becoming a garb to legitimise all the evil the state is
purporting on its people. Therefore, we
feel the need for the development of alternate mechanisms and
their substitution and
implementation as soon as it is feasible.
