{"id":24491,"date":"2018-02-02T12:20:00","date_gmt":"2018-02-02T18:20:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/themindunleashed.com\/?p=24491"},"modified":"2018-02-02T13:05:26","modified_gmt":"2018-02-02T19:05:26","slug":"statists-gonna-state-statist-huge-character-flaw","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/themindunleashed.com\/2018\/02\/statists-gonna-state-statist-huge-character-flaw.html","title":{"rendered":"Statists Gonna State: Why Being a Statist is a Huge Character Flaw"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201cThere\u2019s no polite way to suggest to someone that they have devoted their life to a folly.\u201d<\/em> ~Daniel Dennett<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

There\u2019s an unresolved debate over whether human beings are inherently good or evil. It\u2019s at the core of the debate between tyranny and freedom, between having rulers and being self-ruled. It\u2019s at the root of the conversation being had about leadership and the ability to lead others. It\u2019s at the heart of the question: can we solve our problems without resorting to violence?<\/p>\n

Depending on one\u2019s disposition, \u2018lovers gonna love\u2019<\/em> and \u2018haters gonna hate.\u2019<\/em> But there\u2019s a hidden element that muddies everything up. There\u2019s a covert factor. It\u2019s so evident that it\u2019s almost forgotten amidst the civic morass of it all, and it\u2019s this: \u2018statists gonna state.\u2019<\/em> Which creates a vicious cycle. Indoctrinated statism brainwashes would-be lovers into divisive haters.<\/p>\n

I freely admit that my biased opinion is that human beings tend to be good. We are good until an unhealthy environment changes us. The state is<\/em> that unhealthy environment, and statism is the ugly ideology that arises from its unsustainable and untenable machinery. Unhealthy development in an unhealthy environment leads to unhealthy individuals, no matter how healthy (good or bad) their original state may have been.<\/p>\n

At the end of the day, it matters very little if humans are inherently good or not. Such an argument (either way) is ultimately a red herring for what really matters. What really matters is how we act individually. What really matters is the quality of our character. Which leads to the quality of our leadership. It is leadership which ultimately makes or breaks the development of our character.<\/p>\n

My argument is that you are less likely to have a robust, courageous and compassionate character if you are a statist. You are less likely to take personal responsibility for your actions, and thus more likely to push your responsibility onto an impersonal authority. In other words: you\u2019re less likely to become an authentic leader. When you are a statist, you are more likely to be an indifferent, corruptible, and violent follower.<\/p>

<\/div>