I had always wondered what makes statists different from voluntaryists. Over the last 6 years or so, I’ve met and got to know several statists. They call themselves conservatives, liberals, communists, Marxists, Republicans, Democrats, some even call themselves Libertarians. The underlying similarity between all these statists is that their goal (the things they do in their everyday lives, the way they deal with each other and strangers) is not to make the world a better place or to even make their lives better, it is to control other people. They want to control the way other people behave and live their lives. There is little or no introspection, they never actually look at themselves. What I found most interesting is how they react when they meet a voluntaryist (what I consider a normal person). It is like they are confused, they on one hand see the freedom inherent in the voluntaryist’s being and are attracted to it, but they also seem to feel a seething hatred for the freedom. Almost all of them try to do whatever they can, manipulate, attack, etc. to try to turn the voluntaryists into one of them. Try is the key phrase there, because there is nothing anyone can do to convince a free person to be a slave. This very aspect of them is what I find most distasteful.
Next, assumption. “When you assume, you make an ass out of u and me.” Assumption is how a statist reacts to almost anything he or she sees. They live in a constant state of us or them. They always see a non-existent enemy around the corner and live in a world of comparison. This quote by George Bush describes this well, “either you’re with us, you’re with the terrreiss.” If you try to explain all of the evils caused by government throughout history to a statist who call himself or herself a liberal, for example the holocaust, they will reply by saying that several businesses also collaborated with the Nazis. If you point out that government regulations create unemployment and poverty, they will point out that several businesses lobby for government to create policies that give those businesses grants or other benefits. They confuse being pro-free enterprise with being pro-business. If you create a system that grants special privileges to those who can pay for it, of course people will lobby for those favors; that is human nature. In the same way, the conservative flavor of statism assumes that because you are against police, you do not want people to be protected against thieves, rapists, and murderers (other statists). They assume that because you do not believe in imaginary borders around countries, you are pro-welfare. I can go on and on with this list, anti-war, marriage laws, drug prohibition…
To any statist I’ve met over the last 6 years who is reading this, thank you for your time, I’ve learned what I wanted.
I find that the often simply cannot conceive of a world without state coercion. It is like the air to them. Also any suggestion that free market solutions actually work and statists ones don't is usually met with 'I suppose you are happy for the poor to starve' or some such non sequitur.
This really is at the heart of it, isn't it?
I think they're attracted to the thing that deep down they know they need - the peace that accepting the reality of free will brings to a person - but to accept that is to admit having done evil and most likely having invested one's own life and livelihood in something evil - being a cop, working for a government contractor, etc.; so they lash out.
So, it makes sense that statists instead try to control the world around them instead of operating from principle, from the inside out, and trying to first be right with themselves. It's the "easier" path. Maybe we should find ways in our conversations with statists to make it easier for them to admit wrong-doing, if we admit our own wrong-doings too.