Are People Too Stupid to Decide for Themselves?

This is the big question I face. Are people so stupid that they cannot make their own decisions, that the only solution government intervention?

Do you want to live in a society that says, "YES" people are too stupid to know what's best for them, so the only way to HELP these people is to FORCE them by COERCION to do what's best for themselves? The US (and the rest of the world), largely thinks, YES, people are too stupid to decide what to do on their own. Compulsory, schooling starts at a young age because the government doesn't trust the public to become educated enough to perform high paying jobs. Many people accept this, because many people like the idealized middle class amounts of wealth, so we force kids to go to school. Are people too stupid to wear a seatbelt in a car? We say yes, and mandate wearing a seatbelt. Most people don't object to this law, because most people are smart enough to wear a seatbelt voluntarily. Are people too stupid to become addicted to harmful narcotics? Yes, so we ban them. Are people too stupid to not get loans that charge excessive interest rates? We impose usury laws. Are people too stupid to get homeowner's insurance? Yes, it becomes a law. Are people too stupid to travel in safe cars? Yes. The government then regulates them. Are people too stupid to eat unhealthy foods? Yes, the government bans trans fats. Are people too stupid to smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol? Yes, so the government imposes a "sin" tax in an effort to curb use.

What will come next? Is government going to mandate exercise for people too stupid to get exercise? Will government mandate political correctness upon conversations? Where can anyone draw the line on preventing people from harming themselves? Will government's prevent poor people from spending money on big screen tvs? The answer is, there will never be a line drawn in the government we have as we know it. Some of this may seem silly, but it is already happening as we know it.

The crux of the argument is that if people are too stupid to make decisions for themselves, what right does any one person have to FORCE them to make the "correct" decisions? The answer most people seem to think is that government is some special deity that knows best. Who determines what the "correct" decisions actually are? The answer given by most people is unfortunately AGAIN government. Why would anyone trust one small group of people to dictate what anyone can do with your own property (I define property as your own body and your posessions)?

The only LOGICALLY consistent way is to allow people to make their own mistakes with their property and let any person use any medium to try to PERSUADE anyone to making what the one person deems a correct decision, but ultimately people's property should be left to persuasion and not coersion.

The government is also, apparently, in the business of dictating morality. The government wants a morally upright country, but in reality, if an individual does not have the option to make an immoral decision without being jailed, has the person acted moral? If the US dictates that everyone must pray to God once a day and you do it, have you acted moral or do you just care more about freedom from jail rather than freedom to be moral? The answer is obviously, NO you have not made a moral upright decision, you have made a decision that prevents you from jail. Dictating morality will never make logical sense. Watching Kinsey recently reminded me of the old sex laws "no anal, no homosexual, no oral sex". These morality laws are all laughable in today's society now, but older generations used to think you should be allowed to dictate morality between consenting adults. Now those have gone out the window, but we still ban prostitution? Two consenting adults have now had sex, but it's "perverse" because money was transacted? Should we ban 20-somethings marrying wealthy 80-somethings, because they, are in all likelihood, just after his money? Of course not. We also dictate morality in terms of forced welfare through taxation. People should be forced to give money to the poor, because the government deems it immoral to not help them out. But who sets what one "deserves" to have? Government. Blindly giving money to someone never really helps them. It'd be much more efficient to TEACH them by compassion and persuasion how to get out of poverty rather than blindly redistribute weatlh and mess up incentives. Giving the poor a base line of benefits incentivizes them to save poor for the steady free lunches they provide and discourages them from ekeing up the financial ladder which is what built this country. So on top of welfare being unhelpful at solving problems but merely temporary bandaids, my BIGGEST problem is that large-scale organized theft (in the form of taxes) took place to fund this problem on the basis of forced morality (people well off should help those less fortunate).

I dare you to read For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto by Murray N. Rothbard and not become a Libertarian.
Also in audio book format for your ipod: For A New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto