| Related sites for http://www.laissez-fairerepublic.com/Coercion.htm |
| Condorcet\'s_Method A pairwise election system where ranked ballots are used to simulate many head-to-head elections, where the winner is the candidate who wins all pairings. | | Karma_and_Reincarnation Consequences of this doctrine for your daily life. | | Chat_With_Ray_Kurzweil The transcript of a chat with Ray Kurzweil and others on the book "Are We Spiritual Machines?". | | Boston_Chapter_ALA The chapter was chartered in 1974 and has close to 200 members. Our membership is comprised of large and small private law firms as well as corporate and governmental legal departments. The goal of th | | National_Voting_Rights_Institute A non-profit organization dedicated to challenging the constitutionality of the current campaign finance system at the federal and state levels. Through litigation and public education. | | The_National_Security_Agency_Declassified__History,_Organization_and_Operations Declassified documents on the history, organization and operations of America's most secretive spy agency and the controversial ECHELON intelligence sharing program. | | Grand_IOOF_Lodge_of_the_Netherlands_and_Belgium History, information, subordinate lodges, and news. | | Australian_Caption_Centre Offers captioning services for the deaf and hearing impaired. | | Winters,_Danny Diary of life in India and Japan with pictures. Promoting and supporting the translation and distribution of early Seventh-day Adventist literature. | | Hunger_Solutions_Minnesota A membership organization comprised of the six America's Second Harvest affiliated food banks, more than 300 food shelves, and over 80 emergency feeding programs throughout Minnesota. Advocates for an | | Bella_Pagan_Forum Articles and information on a wide range of pagan beliefs. Reference index, monthly newsletter and moderated message board resources available. | | Natural_Light_Raw_Foods Information about a raw food diet including recipes, testimonials, supplies and news. | | Center_on_Budget_and_Policy_Priorities__Earned_Income_Tax_Credit Analyses of EITC proposals from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal/progressive policy organization. | | Free_Methodist_World_Missions Offers missionary profiles, areas served, magazine, contact information and giving opportunities. | | On_the_Appeal_to_Intuitions_in_Ethics Excerpted from 'Singer and His Critics' (Oxford, 1999). | | Ben_Wattenberg Campaigner on the issue of population decline. | | Knowles,_Charlotte,_Jonathan,_and_Louise Abducted by their father in 1989. | | Infidel_Death_Beds An account of Voltaire's death. | | Blue_Mountain_Christian_Retreat Christian family Conference and retreat center in Northeastern PA. | | Universal_Life_Church_Legal_Cases A collection of legal cases involving the Universal Life Church. |
|
|
Coercion, a Preliminary Definition
A Few Preliminary
Definitions by
Sam Wells
Such
terms as "coercion," "violence," "voluntary relationship,"
and "freedom" are crucial to an understanding of the libertarian
position and it is not inaccurate
to say that one of the main characteristics
that sets libertarians apart from the vast majority of non-libertarians
is that libertarians in general
hold a clear distinction in their minds between those human activities
which they claim should be permissible
and those which should be banned by law. Unlike the vast majority
of the non-libertarian population, libertarians
generally know the difference between a voluntary relationship
and a coercive or violent one, and
they know the difference in fairly clear terms.
It is with these terms that I hope to deal in the following paragraphs.
Although I have used these formulations, particularly the definition of
"coercion" or violence, since 1972 as a means of achieving more
clarity in political discourse, other libertarians have expressed these
same concepts in different ways
and terminology.
"Coercion" (or "violent
force") is an act by a human or humans against the
will or without the permission of another human being with respect
to that which is his own (his own person or property).
It means for someone to take, use, meddle
with or otherwise do something to the body
or property of another human being without the permission or
against the will of that other human being.
This includes fraud and embezzlement and
other indirect uses of force as well as direct physical
violence.
If someone does something to the body or property
of someone else without their permission
or against their will, that is what we mean by
coercion, coercive force, or violence in this context. There are two kinds
of coercion: initiatory coercion (the use of coercive force
against someone who has not committed a coercive
act against anyone) and retaliatory coercion (the use of coercive
force in retaliation against someone who
has initiated the use of coercion against someone). It is the
initiation of the use of coercion that all
libertarians oppose on principle since
it is the violation of the self-ownership or property rights of innocent
human beings (those who have not initiated the use
of violence against anyone). Most libertarians
favor the proper and righteous use of coercive force,
according to rules of due process, against criminals, those who
have been convicted of violating the rights of someone
by initiatory coercion.
A voluntary relationship is a human
relationship in which the wills of all
the participants coincide (agree) with respect to the terms of the
relationship. A voluntary relationship does
not (necessarily) mean one in which a person "volunteers" in
the sense of performing some work for no material compensation (such as
donating ones time and energies to working for a charity or on civic activities).
It includes any mutually agreed-upon exchange (such as working as an employee
for a company in exchange for a salary or wages.) Libertarians oppose
any coercive interference -- either by government or by criminals -- with
such voluntary exchanges. This is why libertarians oppose government
controls on prices, wages, rents, and interest rates -- since such controls
represent coercive interference with the terms of voluntary exchanges and
relationships.
These definitions imply 1) a social
context, 2) a volitional context, and
an 3) ownership context. The definitions assume that human beings
have wills (desires, says-sos, wishes) over which
they have at least some control and that
there is more than one human living in the same area.
(An individual human being living on an otherwise deserted island
would be outside our context since he would not be able to coerce
anyone or be coerced by anyone; nor would he be able to engage
in any voluntary relationship since that would require
at least one other person with whom to
interact.)
We say someone is (or theoretically
would be) "free" or enjoys "civil liberty"
if there is an absence of coercion in his life while
living in a social context. In other words, a man is free or "has
freedom" to the extent that, in a
social context, he
retains exclusive right of control over that which belongs
to him (his person and his legitimately
acquired property).
If I tie my shoes in a way that you do not
like, I am meeting only the first two
of the three criteria – that is, I am a human being and I am doing
something against someone else's will; however, I
am not doing anything against someone
else's will with respect to that which is their own (their
person or property). Notice that I am performing
the action on my own shoes, not
someone else's. If, however, I were to go over and tie your
shoes against your will or without your permission,
that would be an act of
coercion. This is a simple, and somewhat silly, hypothetical
example to illustrate the point of distinction.
Let us apply the three
requirements to real-world examples to prove the practicality of this approach:
Is advertising coercive of human
rights? Do TV commercials impose
violence on
viewers? Or do they merely seek to change your mind
through persuasion? If
a software manufacturer offers his product at a
lower price, does this constitute violence
against the rights of his
competitors or anyone else? If a man looks
at a woman with lust in his
heart, whether it be good or bad manners,
is this an act of violent coercion which
violates her rights? With clear definitions to make the
proper distinctions
between what is "coercive violence" and what is not, these
questions can be answered without ambiguity.
If a representative
of "the Mafia" tells a storekeeper that his place of business
will be hit by a bomb or riddled with bullets if he does not fork over
a certain amount of "protection money" every week, is this a
threat of violence? It certainly is. If an organized group
of people called "the government" confiscate a man's
bank account because, they say, he "owes"
back taxes, is this coercion? The answer is clearly yes. If
agents of the government take or use a
man's land for "public use" or if they regulate
him concerning how he may use his own land, does this constitute violence?
Of course, it does.
How does one know
when his or her rights have been violated? Has
violence been initiated or not? There
are relatively few if any "grey areas" in
answering these questions if one consistently adheres to the three-part
definition of "coercion" or "violent
force" above.
Ayn Rand noted one of the three
basic principles of ideological warfare in
this way: "When opposite basic principles are clearly and openly
defined, it works to the advantage
of the rational side; when they are not clearly defined,
but are hidden or evaded, it works to the advantage of the irrational
side."
In the ideological
war being waged today, it is in the interests of those who oppose liberty
and human rights to obfuscate and blur as much as they can the distinction
in peoples' minds between coercive and non-coercive activities.
It is in the interests
of such statists to confuse the definition of individual rights and erect
false notions of "rights"
(such as "group rights") which conflict with true human rights.
Conversely, it is in the interests of
libertarians to clarify these issues and to make clear distinctions between
what is truly coercive of human rights and what is not.
Related Articles or Documents
The Three
Categories of Human Activity and How They Relate to the Proper Role of
Political Government -- or, Where Libertarians Would Draw the Line
Dr.
Walter Williams on Violence & the Moral Limits of Political Action
Separation of Force and Whim
-- The Laissez-Faire Republic vs. Whimarchy: The Principle of Clearly Defined Individual
Human Rights in a Limited Constitutional Republic versus the Tyranny of
Unlimited Government by Whim
Constitutional Republic vs Democracy: The Role of a Majority Vote in a Free Society Versus Unlimited Majority Rule in a Democracy Did the founders of the United States of America intend to establish a democracy? Is a republic merely a representative democracy?
Selected Historical Documents
List of Major Documents, Books, Essays,
Pamphlets, & Tracts in the Historical
Development of the American
Constitutional Republic, and how this increasingly placed legal limitations on the prerogatives of political rulers (first the King and then the Parliament itself), thus effecting a separation of whim from the use of government force by the assertion of private rights.
An Outline
of Political Systems, and Where the Laissez-Faire Republic Fits
|
|
