Arguments Against the Abolition of Slavery and Arguments Against the Abolition of Government

8/13/2019 Arguments Against the Abolition of Slavery and Arguments Against the Abolition of Government

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/arguments-against-the-abolition-of-slavery-and-arguments-against-the-abolition 1/4

7.2.2014 Printer Friendly Version

http://www.independent.org/printer.asp?page=%2Fnewsroom%2Farticle%2Easp?id=2589 1/4

Print Window

The Independent Institute Commentary

Why We Couldn't Abolish Slavery Then and Can't

Abolish Government Now By Robert Higgs | Posted: Thu. August 20, 2009

Slavery existed for thousands of years, in all sorts of societies and all parts of the world. Toimagine human social life without it required an extraordinary effort. Yet, from time to time,eccentrics emerged to oppose it, most of them arguing that slavery is a moral monstrosity andtherefore people should get rid of it. Such advocates generally elicited reactions that rangedfrom gentle amusement to harsh scorn and violent assault.

When people bothered to give reasons for opposing the proposed abolition, they advancedmany different ideas. In the first column of the accompanying table, I list ten such ideas that Ihave encountered in my reading. At one time, countless people found one or more of thesereasons an adequate ground on which to oppose the abolition of slavery.

In retrospect, however, these reasons seem shabby—more rationalizations than reasons. Theynow appear to nearly everyone to be, if not utterly specious, then shaky or, at best,unpersuasive, notwithstanding an occasional grain of truth. No one now dredges up these ideasor their corollaries to support a proposal for reestablishing slavery. Although vestiges of slaveryexist in northern Africa and a few other places, the idea that slavery is a defensible socialinstitution is defunct. Reasons that once, not so long ago, seemed to provide compellinggrounds for opposing the abolition of slavery now pack no intellectual punch.

Strange to say, however, the same ideas once trotted out to justify opposition to the abolition of slavery are now routinely trotted out to justify opposition to the abolition of government (as weknow it). Libertarian anarchists bold enough to have publicly advanced their proposal for abolishing the state will have encountered many, if not all, of the arguments used for centuriesto prop up slavery. Thus, we may make a parallel list, as shown in the table’s second column.

In the table, my repetition of the cumbersome expression “government (as we know it)” mayseem odd, or even irritating, but I have chosen to tax the reader’s patience in this way for areason. When the typical person encounters an advocate of anarchism, his immediate reactionis to identify a list of critical government functions—preservation of social order, maintenance of a legal system for resolving disputes and dealing with criminals, protection against foreignaggressors, enforcement of private property rights, support of the weak and defenseless,production and maintenance of economic infrastructure, and so forth. This reaction, however,shoots at the wrong target.

Libertarian anarchists do not deny that such social functions must be carried out if a society isto function successfully. They do deny, however, that we must have government (as we knowit) to carry them out. Libertarian anarchists prefer that these functions be carried out by private





providers with whom the beneficiaries have agreed to deal. When I write about government “aswe know it,” I am referring to the monopolistic, individually nonconsensual form of governmentthat now exists virtually everywhere on earth.

Readers may object that at least some existing governments do have the people’s consent, butwhere’s the evidence? Show me the properly signed and witnessed contracts. Unless all of theresponsible adults subject to a government’s claimed authority have voluntarily and explicitly

accepted its governance on specific terms, the presumption must be that the rulers have simplyimposed their rule. Propaganda statements, civics texts, opinion surveys, barroom allegations,political elections, and so forth are beside the point in this regard. No one would think of proffering such forms of evidence to show that I have a valid contract with Virgin Mobile, whichsupplies me with telelphone service. When will the governments of the United States, the stateof Louisiana, and St. Tammany Parish send me the contracts wherein I may agree (or not) topurchase their “services” on mutually acceptable terms?

The similarity of arguments against the abolition of slavery and arguments against the abolition

of government (as we know it) should shake the faith of all Americans who still labor under themisconception that ours is a “government of the people, by the people, for the people.” Fromwhere I stand, it looks distressingly like an institutional complex that rests on the same shakyintellectual foundations as slavery.

Arguments Against the Abolition of Slavery and Arguments Against the Abolition of Government (as We Know It)

Slavery is natural. Government (as we know it) is natural.

Slavery has always existed. Government (as we know it) has alwaysexisted.

Every society on earth has slavery. Every society on earth has government(as we know it)

The slaves are not capable of taking careof themselves.

The people are not capable of taking careof themselves

Without masters, the slaves will die off. Without government (as we know it), thepeople will die off.

Where the common people are free, theyare even worse off than slaves

Where the common people have nogovernment (as we know it), they aremuch worse off (e.g., Somalia).





Getting rid of slavery would occasion greatbloodshed and other evils.

Getting rid of government (as we know it)would occasion great bloodshed andother evils.

Without slavery, the former slaves wouldrun amuck, stealing, raping, killing, andgenerally causing mayhem.

Without government (as we know it), thepeople would run amuck, stealing, raping,killing, and generally causing mayhem.

Trying to get rid of slavery is foolishlyutopian and impractical; only a fuzzy-headed dreamer would advance such a

cockamamie proposal.

Trying to get rid of government (as weknow it) is foolishly utopian andimpractical; only a fuzzy-headed dreamer

would advance such a cockamamieproposal.

Forget abolition. A far better plan is tokeep the slaves sufficiently well fed,clothed, housed, and occasionallyentertained and to take their minds off their exploitation by encouraging them to

focus on the better life that awaits them inthe hereafter.

Forget anarchy. A far better plan is tokeep the ordinary people sufficiently wellfed, clothed, housed, and entertained andto take their minds off their exploitation byencouraging them to focus on the better

life that awaits them in the hereafter.

Robert Higgs is Senior Fellow in Political Economy at The IndependentInstitute and Editor at Large of the Institute’s quarterly journal The

Independent Review . He received his Ph.D. in economics from Johns HopkinsUniversity, and he has taught at the University of Washington, Lafayette College,Seattle University, and the University of Economics, Prague. He has been a

visiting scholar at Oxford University and Stanford University, and a fellow for theHoover Institution and the National Science Foundation. He is the author of many books,including Depression, War, and Cold War .

Full Biography and Recent Publications

New from Robert Higgs!CRISIS AND LEVIATHAN (25TH ANNIVERSARY EDITION):Critical Episodes in the Growth of American GovernmentThe size and scope of government power has grown in responseto crises of war and economic upheavals. Such increased power remains long after each crisis passes, threatening both civil andeconomic liberties, all at the behest of special interest groups.Learn More »»





Documents

Arguments Against the Abolition of Slavery and Arguments Against the Abolition of Government