MacD

I recently watched "Why I Was Wrong About Atheism" and "Why I Was Right About Atheism". I started thinking about Stefan's concept of atheism as being the worship of the state. This lead me to reread and rewatch arguments of the late Christopher Hitchens, whose works and debates were as influential to me in becoming an atheist as Stefan's were to me becoming an anarchist. It has been a few years since I visited Hitchens' works, but I still find value in his anti-theist arguments. However, I have drifted far away from his political philosophy, which I can best describe as "anti-totalitarian"-yet-still-statist-leftism. It is strange to think how a man who put so much value into reason and rationality could not turn his skepticism towards the fundamentals of the state. After all, the state, not unlike god, is a concept of the mind with no basis in material reality. I decided to preform a thought experiment by taking some of my favorite quotes and arguments from Hitchens to tweak the language to address not the claims of religion, but those of the state. I expressed this idea on a comment to Stefan's latter video, and I've decided to expand on it. From Hitch-22, “I try to deny myself any illusions or delusions, and I think that this perhaps entitles me to try and deny the same to others, at least as long as they refuse to keep their fantasies to themselves.” Perhaps this way I can honor his memory by using his own logic to dispel the illusions and delusions of the state. Hitchens' arguments against religion are strong; I can't help but to wonder how he would respond if he was posed these same arguments about the state: Hitchens' Quote: Name me an ethical statement made or an action performed by a believer that could not have been made or performed by a non-believer. … Could you name a wicked action or a vile statement made by someone, attributable only to their religious faith? Modified Quote: Name me an ethical statement made or an action performed through the state that could not have been made or performed voluntarily. … Could you name a wicked action or a vile statement made by someone, attributable only to their belief in the state? Hitch: Not imposed? Did you really say not imposed? What if you reject this offer, what are you told? What have you been told by centuries of Christians if you reject this offer that took place by means of a torture to death of a human being that you didn't want and should have prevented if you could? What if you reject the offer? And if you accept it you have eternal life and your sins are forgiven. Oh, great. What a horrible way to abolish your own responsibility and get your own bliss. I don't want it. Oh, you don't? Well then you can go to hell. This is not imposed? This hasn't been preached to children by gruesome elderly virgins backed by force for centuries? This hasn't poisoned whole societies? No, of course it's imposed, it's not voluntary. Modified: Not imposed? Did you really say not imposed? What if you reject this offer, what are you told? What have you been told by centuries of patriots if you reject this offer that took place by means of war and death of thousands of human beings that you didn't want and should have prevented if you could? What if you reject the offer? And if you accept it you have safety and security. Oh, great. What a horrible way to abolish your own responsibility and get your own bliss. I don't want it. Oh, you don't? Well then you can go to jail. This is not imposed? This hasn't been preached to children by teachers and politicians backed by force for centuries? This hasn't poisoned whole societies? No, of course it's imposed, it's not voluntary. Hitch: That's fine but you must leave me out of it [your religious observance], I don't want to be told that I have to obey these laws too, or that my children have to be taught this in school, or that laws have to be written to ratify the bizarre beliefs of a cult like yours. … That's what I need you to understand. You're quite happy to believe this, why can't you keep it to yourself? (Why can't you keep your atheism to yourself?) Because the religious won't just allow me to, because every time I open the paper there's another instance of theocratic encroachment on free society, which I won't put up with. Up with which, I will not put... Modified: That's fine but you must leave me out of it [your ideological observance], I don't want to be told that I have to obey these laws too, or that my children have to be taught this in school, or that laws have to be written to ratify the bizarre beliefs of a government like yours. … That's what I need you to understand. You're quite happy to believe this, why can't you keep it to yourself? (Why can't you keep your anarchism to yourself?) Because the state won't just allow me to, because every time I open the paper there's another instance of statist encroachment on free society, which I won't put up with. Up with which, I will not put... Hitch: What has this [the consequences of religious charity] got to do with the existence of god or the validity of religious claims? Modified: What has this [the consequences of welfare] got to do with the existence of the state or the validity of statist claims? Hitch: The gods that we've made are exactly the gods you'd expect to be made by a species that's about half a chromosome away from being chimpanzee. Modified: The governments that we've founded are exactly the governments you'd expect to be made by a species that's about half a chromosome away from being chimpanzee. Hitch: Morality comes from us; religion claims to have invented it on our behalf. Modified: Morality comes from us; the state claims to have invented it on our behalf. Hitch: “If god is dead, isn’t everything permissible?” … this seems to me is a very profound insult to us in our very deepest nature and character. It is not the case, I submit to you, that we do not set about butchering and raping and thieving right now only because we’re afraid of a divine punishment or because we are looking for a divine reward. Modified: “If there is no government, isn’t everything permissible?” … this seems to me is a very profound insult to us in our very deepest nature and character. It is not the case, I submit to you, that we do not set about butchering and raping and thieving right now only because we’re afraid of a legal punishment or because we are looking for a legal reward.

Thanks for the warm welcome! At this point, I am learning a lot about the good, bad, and ugly about the social work business. We have a really good judge in Evansville who tries to get kids put our facility when they'd benefit more from us than a punitive environment. One pressing downside is that the state will audit us annually and tries to cut our funding wherever they can. The "ugly" is that a lot of people have a negative impression about the kids in the program; some are abuse victims, some are one mistake away from going to jail, but most are a mix of the two. I would like to think these kids would get the shelter and treatment they need in a free society, but the stigma they carry makes me nervous for them. As for UPB, I've watched a few of Stef's videos on it, but it's still on my to-read list. I love his other books, though.

A bit about myself: I am a college student. Recently I changed my major from history education to social work. Over the past couple years, my political and philosophical identity has gone through major changes. When I entered college, I was a democratic socialist. By the time I ended community college I was an anarcho-syndicalist. After discovering Stefan and Freedomain Radio, I resisted at first but today I consider myself an anarcho-capitalist, mainly due to greater understanding of the non-aggression principle. This summer I got a job working at a youth home for at-risk teenagers. It is tough work, but I love it. It has made me interested in pursuing this type of work as a career. The organization I work for is privately owned, but gets a large amount of funding from the state of Indiana. Stefan has talked about state workers and their dependency on the problems they are supposed to be solving. However, everyone I work with has genuine interest in helping the kids that come through with personal responsibility, keeping them in school, and getting them the counseling they need. I feel like I am doing good by these kids; a lot of them have very few positive adult figures in their lives. One thing that does bother me is that, if I do pursue a career in social work, I will probably either work for the state or a state-sponsored organization. Since taxation is the initiation of force, and the agencies I would/currently work for are funded with taxes, is it immoral or unethical to work for these agencies?