by Harry Browne

Politicians claim moral authority by implying that their decisions are dictated by moral principle - and by assuming that we can't let everyone decide for himself what is moral and what isn't. That leaves only the politicians to decide what is right and what is wrong. So they claim a license to use government to compel us to do everything that's right and to forbid us to do everything that's wrong.

But the Constitution gives the federal government no authority to tell us how to live our lives. It gives the politicians no authority to make your financial decisions or your personal decisions. That doesn't stop them, however.

Democratic and Republican politicians treat us as dysfunctional children who need the attention of a strict government to decide what we can have, see, hear, and read, and what we can say publicly. Neither of the two major parties recognizes any limits on the government's authority over your life.

Of course, all politicians like to pose as supporters of your family. But their "support" really means making your decisions for you:

• Democrats invoke the "children" on behalf of every new government boondoggle and regulation - whether to censor the Internet or put a V-chip in your television set.
• Republicans claim they will restore family values by stamping out drug use or posting the 10 Commandments in schools. Somehow they think you can't instill family values in your children unless the politicians apply force.

None of the politicians believes you're capable of deciding for yourself what's best for your family. If they really trusted you, they'd repeal the income tax - so you'd have the wherewithal to make your own family decisions, so you could afford to send your child to schools that teach what you want your child to learn, and so you could afford to have one parent at home to supervise your children according to your values.

America's politicians lament the decline in moral standards. They tell us we must raise our sights above our own shabby little lives, and give ourselves to a greater cause. They say we must practice the politics of compassion, that we must use our resources to help others, that we must solve the problems of racism, poverty, and inequality.

The oratory soars - but goes nowhere.

The politician really means that you must give up your concern for your family and whatever else you care for - areas where you might actually make a difference - and support whatever causes he's hitched his political wagon to.

He means you must stop demonstrating your compassion in ways that make sense to you, and instead give him more money to divert to programs - government or private - that have the political pull to capture his allegiance.

He means you must fight racism, poverty, and inequality not through your own kindness and decency, but by giving him more power and money to reward the squeaky wheels - the unappeasable organizations and grievance mongers who live off the ills they bemoan.

When a politician promises to raise moral standards in America, it's easy to think he's referring to the moral standards in which you believe. You think you've found someone who's going to use the force of government to impose your moral values on others.

But when government acts, the values imposed won't be yours and they won't be mine. Moral values will be set by whoever has the most political power - people like Teddy Kennedy or Newt Gingrich. Is that what you want to impose on others?

And don't forget that the force of government will be used to impose those values on you as well. No one is going to exempt you from the "Make America a Moral Place Act [of 2001]."

Even if you have some reason to believe Congress will legislate the moral rules you like, those rules are only temporary. The next Congress will go off in its own direction.

(Article Continues Below)

SET THEM FREE

The entire effort to wed morality and politics is based on the assumption that there are immoral or irresponsible people who can't be bent into shape unless the government does it.

Yes, there are people who won't act responsibly. There are people who have no regard for the consequences of their own acts. There are people who seem to be incapable of behaving wisely or benevolently.

Politicians exploit these people to justify rigid controls on your life. Because some people won't plan for their old age, you must be forced into Social Security. Because some people will do funny things after looking at dirty pictures on the Internet, your access to the Internet must be restricted.

So what should we do about people who won't take responsibility for their own actions? I believe the answer is simple:

Set them free.

Give them the freedom to make their own decisions, to face the consequences of their own acts, to see for themselves what their actions do to others, and how others respond to them.

Only free people have an incentive to be virtuous. Only people who bear the consequences of their own acts will care about those consequences.

A free society rewards virtue and punishes irresponsibility. Government does just the opposite.

What do we do about people who might not plan for their own retirement?

Set them free.

Let each person know that his future depends largely on his own actions. If younger people see some older people who haven't planned ahead and have to rely on charity, the young will be more likely to provide for the future. Today when someone plans poorly, the only consequence younger people see is a call for more government.

What do we do about people who are insensitive to other people?

Set them free.

Let other people shun them or respect them for what they do. Let them feel the results of being civil or uncivil.

It is often said that freedom and responsibility are two sides of the same coin - that if you want freedom, you must first accept the responsibility that goes with it.

The truth is simpler. Freedom and responsibility aren't two sides of the same thing; one isn't a precondition for the other. They are the same thing.

Freedom is responsibility. Responsibility is experiencing the consequences of your own acts - not the consequences of others' acts or making others pay for what you do.

And that's what freedom is. Without government to force others to pay for your pleasures or mistakes, and without forcing you to pay for what others do, you are a free, responsible human being.

Freedom and responsibility are inseparably linked - not because they should be, but because they are. Responsibility accompanies freedom, whether or not you want it to.

We are told America must have a moral revival before we can have greater freedom - that people must be educated to be responsible before they can be free. This puts the cart before the horse.

If we expect a government program to make people responsible, we will wait forever.

We don't need a moral revival, we don't need politicians making moral decisions for us. We need do only one thing to induce people to act more responsibly:

Set them free.

If you enjoyed this post, please make a donation to help keep this website active:

Click Here for the Free Populist Party Newsletter

Originally published at HarryBrowne.org and excerpted from The Great Libertarian Offer.

Harry Browne (RIP 1933-2006), the author of Why Government Doesn't Work and many other books, was the Libertarian Party presidential candidate in 1996 and 2000, a co-founder of DownsizeDC, and the Director of Public Policy for the American Liberty Foundation.  See his website.

More Articles from Harry Browne