| by Barry A. Liebling
Who owns your life? If you believe you belong to society, or the nation, or an economic class, or an ethnic group and your duty is to sacrifice yourself to serve the larger whole you are submitting to collectivism. Alternatively, if you understand that you have legitimate self-ownership and sovereignty, have a natural right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and to identify and seek your own goals, and that this applies to everyone else as well, you are endorsing individualism. The conflict between collectivism – with roots that go back to ancient times, through feudalism, monarchies, and totalitarian states – and individualism which was first articulated by philosophers in The Enlightenment – is perpetual. You cannot consistently be in both camps.
Time magazine’s managing editor Richard Stengel, who wrote “The Case for National Service,” and ServiceNation are spearheading a putsch intended to promote collectivism. On September 11, selected because of its symbolic significance, ServiceNation will host an event in New York City “to plan and lay out a bold blueprint on citizen service.” The ServiceNation.org website reveals the sponsors’ intentions – to institute national service and make it permanent. They are aware that the idea strikes many Americans as distasteful, so they attempt to pacify readers by claiming that participation will be voluntary and they “do not support mandatory national service requirements.” But they do support mandatory funding and enforcement. Note well that they are not simply calling for people to volunteer more, they are demanding new laws that will affect everyone. If their “advocacy campaign for national service legislation” succeeds their programs will be paid for with tax dollars and shielded by the government. And what sort of programs is ServiceNation advocating? A wide array of leftist-inspired welfare projects. In their words, the organization is “above all committed to the idea of shared sacrifice.” Its “ultimate goal” is to assure that “increasing numbers of Americans annually will commit a year of their lives to national service.” In a world where there is no shortage of bad ideas and foolish schemes what is the potential of ServiceNation doing serious harm? Consider three likely effects. The economic costs will be enormous. ServiceNation aims to balloon the number of government agencies, the number of citizens employed by the government, and the budget for the programs. The public sector will grow more prodigious than ever, and tax burdens will be increased accordingly. But wealth will not only be diminished by high taxes, its creation will be severely dampened. Those who participate in “national service” will be not be working productively in the private sector. Instead they will be fussing around with new welfare projects that will drain the economy much as existing welfare programs do. This is probably what the sponsors have in mind when they say they are “committed to the idea of shared sacrifice.” If the size of the welfare state is expanded there will be a need for more government bureaucrats to run it. The programs that arise from ServiceNation will be empowering to career public sector enthusiasts who are intent on meddling with everyone’s life. Those with the keenest desire to have legal authority to direct others will be drawn to the new agencies and will be in charge of managing armies of citizens who are “fulfilling their duty to the country.” With a large supply of fresh recruits each year the program bosses will have abundant resources to engage in social engineering – getting people to comply with the wishes of “government experts.” And you can bet that once a new agency is established or an old one expanded the managers will stop at nothing to assure that it never gets smaller. Significantly, the cost of the ServiceNation plan and the fact that it will be a boon to government bureaucrats are not the most serious consequences. More important, the ServiceNation vision is an aggressive assault against the spirit of personal autonomy. When they call for legislation the people behind ServiceNation are demonstrating that their motives are malicious. Consider the difference between private, voluntary service and a program that is set up by the government. If a group of people want to start a service organization on their own to help others they are free to do so. The money used to fund the organization is obtained with the full consent of the donors. People who participate are explicitly willing. Anyone who does not agree with the organization’s goals – or who is simply not interested – is free to stay away and has no obligation to pay for any of it. By contrast, a government-sponsored legislated program is inherently coercive. Taxpayers have to fund it regardless of their sentiments. Even when membership is not mandatory government agencies have the power to use force in ways that private institutions do not. Undoubtedly advocates for ServiceNation would say that they must use the government to achieve their goals because otherwise many people would fail to participate. And that encapsulates the crucial point. Dealing with people by force cannot be justified if you understand individualism – that every person is the legitimate owner of his or her own life. Collectivists do not rule out coercion because they regard each person as communal property. It is unfortunate that when ServiceNation holds its meeting and calls for action some people will be supportive because they do not understand the implications. Far more tragic is that some people will support ServiceNation who do understand. *** See other entries at AlertMindPublishing.com in “Monthly Columns.” *** |