A Giant Leap Towards Dictatorship

To stop the spread of the coronavirus, governments across the nation have closed businesses and ordered citizens to stay at home except for “essential” business or activities. Gatherings of more than ten people or being within six feet of another person in public is now illegal in many jurisdictions.

Freedom of trade, freedom of movement, freedom of association, freedom of assembly are now prohibited by many governments. A large percentage of Americans can no longer produce and trade, travel at will, or associate with others without the government’s approval. In short, many Americans can no longer live as they choose, but only as the government permits.

That governments have taken such rights-violating measures is certainly cause for concern. That many Americans welcome these dictates is frightening. We must wonder what other restrictions on freedom in the name of saving lives or stopping the pandemic will be accepted.

Benjamin Franklin said that those who would sacrifice a little liberty for security deserve neither. Today, individuals are willing to sacrifice their freedoms to stop the coronavirus. And tomorrow, power lusting politicians will demand more sacrifices of freedom to combat the crisis de jure. Throughout history, governments have used crises to expand their power and control over the lives of individuals. And once obtained, that power is seldom relinquished voluntarily.

If this seems like hyperbole, consider how our lives have been impacted in the past few weeks by the actions of government. Many have lost their jobs because governments have closed millions of businesses or greatly restricted their operations. These actions have created great uncertainty about the future, with many fearing further controls and restrictions. In response, the stock markets have plummeted and consumers have emptied store shelves. Nobody knows what controls and restrictions governments will impose next. But few are protesting. Instead, they arrive early at stores hoping to beat the crowd and stock up on supplies.

This is not the way life should be.

The proper purpose of government is the protection of individual rights–the freedom of each individual to live as he chooses, so long as he respects the freedom of others to do the same. But in the past few weeks, governments across the nation have increasingly enacted prohibitions on freedom of choice. They have created uncertainly as to what they will do next. And fundamentally, that uncertainly is because government is no longer constrained by objective moral principles. The citizenry has granted government the authority to do “whatever it takes” to combat the coronavirus pandemic.

When government is not constrained by objective moral principles, individuals do not know what will suddenly become illegal. They do not know if their dreams and plans will suddenly be crushed by a new law. That is now the environment that we now find ourselves in.

Throughout American history, government controls and regulations have been enacted to address some problem. And without exception, those controls and regulations have created new problems. With few exceptions, the response to the new problems has been more controls and regulations.

History is a philosophical laboratory. History shows us the development and consequences of fundamental ideas, both moral and evil. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat the philosophical mistakes and prevented from repeating the philosophical glories.

Similar Posts

  • The Elephant in the Room

    Housing activists frequently proclaim that a household earning the minimum wage cannot afford a two-bedroom apartment. This is the elephant in the room that housing activists refuse to address. As an example, the executive director of the Capital Area Housing Partnership in Michigan writes, The fair market rent for a modest two-bedroom apartment in the…

  • Ghate Discusses his White Paper

    On August 3, Onkar Ghate, ARI senior fellow and chief philosophy officer, was interviewed his white paper, “A Pro-Freedom Approach to Infectious Disease: Planning for the Next Pandemic.” Ghate argues that government has a crucial role to play in a pandemic, but that role should be delimited to testing, isolating the infected, and contact tracing….

  • Deja Vu

    In the last Texas legislative session, great controversy erupted over Austin’s attempts to reign in local governments. Bills were introduced to prohibit local controls over plastic bags, trees, short-term rentals, and more. Local governments claimed that these efforts by the state usurped their authority. A similar controversy has erupted in California. California State Senator Scott…

  • The Crony Ideology

    Both “progressives” and conservatives embrace the crony ideology. That they apply that ideology differently is merely a matter of detail. So, what is the crony ideology? The essence of the crony ideology is the belief that government force should be used to compel or prohibit certain actions. Every act of cronyism ultimately rests on this…

One Comment

  1. One thing we could do immediately is to publicly stress – even demand – that local, state and federal governments specify the period of time that control measures last. It’s our responsibility to remind both government and citizens that emergencies are exactly that. They don’t last forever and neither should unusual measures become a new norm. They should expire with the temporary condition by which they were justified… if they were indeed justified.

Comments are closed.