Quote of the day—Elbert Hubbard

So long as governments set the example of killing their enemies, private individuals will occasionally kill theirs.

Elbert Hubbard
[This is an appealing notion. And I’m pretty sure it is subscribed to by a large number of people. However I think it is exceedingly naïve. Examples are not the sole guide to future behavior.—Joe]

4 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Elbert Hubbard

  1. Perhaps it would be more appropriate at Marko’s or TSM but this seems germane: “Prison is a Socialist’s Paradise, where equality prevails, everything is supplied and competition is eliminated.”

  2. So then, a place like Somalia, devoid of any government, should be Utopia? Who’s packing their bags?

    Or lets go a little further back and just look at some primitive tribes in Papua New Guinea. They have little to no government, yet the homicide rate makes the streets of Watts look tame.

    That and I would dare say that every government that has a low murder rate (which several European countries do) have set a very good example of killing their enemies. Government survival depends on being able to kill one’s enemies efficiently. Governments that don’t do that, tend to selectively exterminate themselves. Even “pacifists” like Switzerland understand that killing an invading aggressor is necessary for the existence of your country.

  3. Government is made of people. Some people need killing. Overthrowing Nazi Germany was the right thing to do. Sending King George’s forces packing was the right thing to do. “Police” and “military” are likewise made of people.

    Regardless of the example set by other men (read – government): People will occasionally kill people, until the End of Time. The only question is whether the natural advantages of size, strength and youth will be offset by technology.

  4. “So then, a place like Somalia, devoid of any government, should be Utopia? Who’s packing their bags?”

    I do not know if Somalia will develop a peaceful non-government paradise there, but I remember someone making the case that they are better off than having no government at all. Often, we assume that “because things are bad at X, it would be better if they did Y”. Too often, we forget what can be called “deltas”–we forget to look at how things have changed.

    Will Somalia develop a peaceful non-government–or at least private government–society? I don’t know. People get the government they desire, whether it be a dictatorship, a republic, or a system of “anarcho-capitalism”. If the people are willing to accept government that violates people’s rights, then every one of these systems will have police willing to torture and bust people’s kneecaps. If people aren’t willing to tolerate these types of behaviors, then these systems, in general, will reflect that, as well.

    I support so-called “anarcho-capitalism”, because I think that it has the best potential for producing an environment of laws that suit everyone’s needs. But I also have no delusions: if I can’t convince anyone else that such a system will be best, then we won’t have it. And if, after it’s established, people turn to knee-busting solutions, we’re doomed! But then, if people come to accept knee-busting, we’ll soon have a knee-busting republic anyway, because we’ll put those types of people into government, as legislators, judges, and executives.

Comments are closed.