Many progressives try to claim that intervention from the State (government) is the best solution to any problem in society, rather than a solution from a private voluntary approach. They claim that the cause of our problems in society originate from big business, religion, and the big banksters that use force and coercion, and have control of the population. They are partially correct about big corporations, business, banks, and Wall Street. But this is not where the control and force in society originates from.
When progressives say a big company has control of the market. What does that mean? How do they have control? First, let’s define “market”. The market is just an aggregation of individuals trading goods or services for a medium of exchange (money). A free market is an aggregation of individuals consensually trading goods, services, and money upon their own volition without any external coercion or initiation of force. In order for a company to have control of the market (in a free market), the company must provide products or services that individuals want, at a price they are willing to pay upon their own consent. The reality is that the market has control of the companies. A company in a free market can only thrive when it adds value to society.
A big company in any Statist society like America, with regulation (coercion) can thrive without adding value to society. The best way for big business to thrive in America is to have some connection to the State. Look at GE, or GM, or big oil companies, blackwater, and many other big powerful corporations. Look at the big banks, and Wall Street. They all have arterial attachments to the State by way of lobbyists, donations, or direct political affiliates, all with the intention of gaining leverage over smaller competitors by increasing regulation that favors those within the elite ruling class, and any smaller company without connections to the State gets pushed out by unfair coercion from the force of the State. The last thing these big powerful businesses want is a voluntary society without the force and leverage of the State. The progressives claim to care about the “little guy”, but as long as they support the State and regulation, the little guy will always be held down.
Somehow religion is another controlling initiator of force according to progressives. There are some religions that initiate force to control others, such as the religions in primitive societies that have sharia law, where you subscribe to that religion, or die. That doesn’t happen in most other religions like Christianity. If you don’t subscribe to Christianity, they won’t kill, or punish you for it. Catholicism used to be voluntary and consensual until the Vatican became its own sovereign nation. It basically went from being a religion into being a government that has a symbiotic relationship with other governments.
You see, the moment any entity (whether it be a business, religion, or an individual) grabs onto the leverage of the State, that’s the point at which it is no longer a voluntary interaction in society. That’s when the entity gains an advantage at the expense of others that must be obedient to the violence of the State. “But Jeremy, the State isn’t violent.” “The government isn’t coming to our homes with guns and initiating force and violence against us, they pretty much leave us alone.” Yeah, I get it. The reason we don’t see the violence is because we are obedient to it. What will happen if you choose to live a peaceful life that does not violate the sovereignty of other individuals, and you choose not to have your money stolen from you by the State (taxation), or you choose not to follow the coercive unfair regulation of the State when interacting consensually with others? At first you will probably be notified of your delinquency, and if you continue to disobey and defend your natural property rights, they will threaten you with fines. If you continue to disobey, they will attempt to collect the fines by seizing your assets. If you choose to defend your individual sovereignty from being violated, they will come with big guns (guns that you are not allowed to have, only they have a right to the big guns) and they will seize your belongings and lock you in a cage. If you refuse to have your belongings stolen from you and refuse to go in the cage and get raped, you will probably make it on the news portrayed as some psychotic vigilante that doesn’t want to live peacefully with others and they will shoot you, and the narrative will be that the State saved the rest of us from a crazy freedom lover. Our obedience hides the violence.
Do you think you actually own your home after you pay off the mortgage? What happens if you don’t pay rent to the State? Yes, you pay rent to the government. They call it property taxation. It’s funny how they just call things by a different name so it doesn’t sound so bad. Like, they call it taxation instead of theft at the point of a gun. If you keep refusing to pay the rent, how much longer do you think you will own your home and not be locked in a cage?
You can choose not to buy products from, or do business with big corporations. If you don’t buy a product from Walmart, or a car from GM, or a membership from Costco, they won’t invade your privacy and force you to do business with them, especially at gunpoint. If you choose not to acknowledge, or worship a christian god, the christians won’t force you into associating with them against your consent. But if you don’t consent to the unethical “social contract” of the State, they will not leave you alone.
The big businesses, corporations, Wall Street, big banks, and others that are politically connected may appear to be the one forcing you around against your will. But when you distill it down to the common denominator, you find that the origin of the initiation of force against your will is the violent use of the big guns of the State. Putting a gun to ones head and forcing them into a non consensual contract is known to be unethical in our individual personal lives, but somehow when the same action is used by the State in the larger stratosphere of society it is considered to be ethical and necessary. Let’s stop supporting the violence, and be a bit more consistent in our ethics.
