|
The nun in the examining chair was embarrassed about her inability to keep her eyes open as I tried to instill drops to dilate her pupils. "Why can't I keep my eyes open, Doctor?" she asked. I gave her the answer I reserved for the religious. "It's original sin, sister." She laughed.
But I wasn't joking. Our first parents' sin has left us with a muddled nature, by which, as St. Paul remarked, we do what we know we should not do, and do not do what we know we should do, even in a trivial matter such as keeping one's eyes open.
It's not so trivial with regard to government. Recall the demand of the Israelites to Samuel: that he appoint a king over them. Samuel discussed it with God, who warned, "This will be the right of the King, that shall reign over you: He will take your sons and put them in his chariots, and will make them his horsemen, and his running footmen to run before his chariots, and he will appoint of them to be his tribunes, and centurions, and to plough his fields, and to reap his corn, and to make him arms and chariots. Your daughters also he will take to make him ointments, and to be his cooks, and bakers. And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your best oliveyards, and give them to his servants. Moreover he will take the tenth of your corn, and of the revenues of your vineyards, to give his eunuchs and servants. Your servants also and handmaids, and your goodliest young men, and your assses he will take away, and put them to his work. Your flocks also he will tithe, and you shall be his servants. And you shall decry out in that day from the face of the king, whom you have chosen to yourselves; and the Lord will not hear you in that day, because you desires unto yourselves a king."
And the people's response? "Nay, but there shall be a king over us, and we also will be like all nations."
Thanks to original sin, we seem to have learned nothing. Oh, to be sure, kings, as such, are obsolete. We now have something called "democracy," or "Constitutional government." And, to be sure, some governments, such as our own, are better than others, just as a cold is better than pneumonia. But government, per se, is to be deplored.
Why? Because ambitious men, of which there is never a shortage, can use government to their own purposes, and government invariably exculpates itself. Government is self-justifying.
A simple example, among hundreds possible: can a band of men demand a portion of your paycheck every week? No, unless they call themselves government. Then they can do it, and without the slightest shame, because it's the law! And how do we know it's the law? They tell us it is; and, in fact, they got together and voted such a law into existence. Can we disobey the law? No, certainly not. Why not? Because they told us we can't, and that's a law, too!
What if we disobey anyway, and keep what is ours? Then we will be charged with violating their law, and they will haul us into a court, which they own and operate, where one of their employees will instruct jurors, if any, that he, not they, will rule upon the law, and they can only decide the facts, which are quite simple: the accused did not turn over his income. A simple and efficient system: conviction is automatic. Of course, the victim can appeal to his enemy's higher courts, or, if he persists in his obstinacy, allow himself to be imprisoned. (To resist arrest, of course, is a crime: they say so. And try to escape: another crime.)
Obviously, governments should be abolished. No human institution has been so pernicious, so harmful, so successful at producing misery, poverty, and fear. Would that bring us heaven on earth? Of course not. We would still have ambitious men, willing to succeed at our expense; but they would no longer be able to hide behind the façade of government, which legitimizes the use of force. Absent that justification, they would be revealed for what they really are: brigands, thieves, and con men. Their futures would include, not handsome retirement benefits and honors, but tar and feathers, jail, and even shotguns.
Jail? How could we have a legal system without government? Easily! What is impossible about free-lance judges, and court in any suitable building, with jurors picked at random-never mind voir dire! Not far from where I write these words, Daniel Boone dispensed justice under a tree in his front yard, and he could scarcely have done worse than the black-robed employees of government do it.
Since the days of Samuel, and before, men have subjected themselves to the tyranny of those whom they allowed to abuse them under the guise of "king," or "government." It's time to wise up, and heed God's warning. Because it is customary and easy, and other nations do it, doesn't make it reasonable or desirable. Admittedly, one can hear laughter in prison, and there are no doubt jokes told in concentration camps. Still, I wouldn't want to be in either one. Nor do I wish to be a slave, even a comfortable one, of "government," simply because it's customary. Some customs are wicked and should be done away with. And the sooner, the better. What could be more foolish than cooperation with the enemy?
|
