I've seen various places referred to as "failed states"-- Somalia being a frequent example. The term is used in an attempt to insult.
The most insulting part is that anyone tolerates those trying to impose a state on them, or that anyone is dumb (or evil) enough to do it to themselves.
If you have a state, you've already failed. You've failed to find voluntary ways to live among other humans and have decided you're going to cheat.
A state is a failed society.
To fail at something which is unnecessary is a tragedy which can bring disaster where none was inevitable before.
Yes, a failed state can be deadly. Any failure can be.
If a dishonest surgeon performs an unnecessary heart transplant on a patient, and it fails, the patient will die. Even if it doesn't "fail", it was a really bad idea. The patient has been harmed whether he realizes it or not. The heart transplant was not a good idea, nor was the one performing it a good guy trying to help.
A state is the same. It's unnecessary and harmful-- even if it doesn't fail. The state is antisocial; based on theft and aggression. It is your enemy. There will be consequences when it fails. And it will fail eventually. They all do.
And when it fails, tragedy is likely. Once you've crippled a population-- trained them out of responsibility, competence, independence, and ethics-- by imposing a state on them, how do you expect them to form a functional society if your state fails? You've done the damage; own it.
Good one, Kent!
ReplyDelete