Genre: Nonfiction--Religion, Philosophy, & Politics
My Rating: 8.5
Summed Up:
Governments exist for only one reason: to make and enforce rules for controlling human conduct. Every rule or law passed has a penalty attached that affects one’s life, liberty, or property. When a government is subject to the voice of the people, such as the United States’ system, then the ultimate responsibility for laws and the subsequent penalties for those who break them rests with the people. Thus, the question of what is the proper role of government is a moral question on the most individual level.
Andersen warns that we are easily deceived about what government should be and we are inclined to accept the following fallacies: anything legal is moral; we are not individually responsible for government action; and a different moral law applies when men act in concert than it does when they act alone. But, we must not succumb to those misconceptions because the continued existence of the Church and individual agency relies on the preservation of a government of freedom.
Freedom is essential to human happiness. Thus, the great problem of man is to discover and obey laws which will make him free. Joy, the very object of existence, can be measured by the amount of freedom man has. To ensure maximum freedom, government must be kept within its proper bounds. However, man has a natural tendency to abuse any power or authority given to him so those in office will enlarge their functions until liberty is crushed under the weight of bureaucratic despotism.
Andersen states that there is a relationship between freedom and righteousness on the one hand, and evil and the denial of freedom on the other. Thus, good and evil can be defined in terms of whether an act increases or decreases freedom. Andersen goes on to define freedom as the power and opportunity to achieve one’s goals and states that it is made up of five parts: life, liberty, property, knowledge, and enticement. He says that virtually all deeds that are considered evil are among those actions that destroy these elements of freedom.
At times, it is right and just to restrict another’s freedom. This is in the case of crime and thus the police power is a necessary function of government. On religious terms, the Lord has authorized man to deprive another of freedom when that person breaks a criminal law by destroying life, liberty, property, or knowledge of others. Andersen warns, however, that this is the only time when the Lord has authorized the use of coercion.
Almost all of us, however, are deposed to exercise unrighteous dominion and tend to use compulsion upon our fellow man. Thus, it is imperative that those who act with the purpose of destroying freedom should have their power and opportunity to do so curtailed. While the force of government is essential to the preservation of freedom, it may also be used to destroy it.
Andersen also examines of in a democracy, the individual is morally responsible for government action. While elected representatives make the laws, their service is dictated by the voting citizen who elects them to office. He says, “The actions of government are the actions of men—performed by men at the command of men."
Many recognize that coercion by an individual on another individual is wrong. However, those same people fail to recognize the coercion performed by government at the behest of the citizen is also wrong. When coercion is imposed in the name of government, success is almost guaranteed since those doing the compelling are using the supreme physical force in society, i.e. the threat of violence and force by the police power. Andersen reminds the reader that, “Governments deal in nothing but force.” That is a truth that many fail to realize. He continues, “the greatest threat to freedom on earth is man acting through the agency of his government.”
Thus, we should the same test of right and wrong regarding the actions of government as we do the actions of the individual. We should never ask the government to do anything which we would consider evil or wrong for us to do ourselves.
The most common method by which government is asked by citizens to deny or interfere in the freedom of others is in regard to the right to own and control property, one of the basic elements of individual freedom. Most people agree that each person has a moral obligation to be charitable, but is it morally right for us to compel others to be as charitable as we think they should be? When we succumb to socialistic welfare tendencies, that is exactly what we are doing. Government can give nothing to one person unless it takes it from someone else. On the individual level, it is obvious that one person cannot take something and give it to another justly. This action does not become right or just simply because now government is doing the taking and giving.
Andersen says that “the Lord is not relying upon man or the puny efforts of government to banish poverty, alleviate pain, and administer to the ills of society by using compulsion. Justice will be done in spite of thing we do or fail to do.” We should, as individuals, care for one another and not force others or use compulsion on them to do so. This decreases their freedom, and our own
You can read my review of Many Are Called, But Few Are Chosen here.
No comments:
Post a Comment