Does the state have the right to plunge a needle into your arm? An Answer from Luna City

Manuel, "Mannie" O'Kelly, Wyoming "Wyoh" Knott, and Professor Bernardo de La Paz discuss how to start a revolution in front of a bottle of Vodka in a secret meeting at the Luna City Hilton. (image created using Dezgo.com)

... the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor's office and plunge a needle into your arm. Alan Dershowitz, May 2020.

It is eventually all about whether you see humans as "good" or "bad." If you think humans are basically bad, then you need a government to force them to behave as they should. And if they don't want to be vaccinated, well, you nudge them first, and if they don't comply, you force them. The opposite holds if you think people are good. 

These two attitudes approximately define the current polarization between libertarians and authoritarians. These two categories used to separate right-wingers from left-winger, but the Covid crisis blurred the boundary, with leftists showing an authoritarian streak that was consistently superior to that of the rightists. 

The two views have been discussed in a prophetic novel written by Robert Anson Heinlein in 1966, "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress." Much of what happened in the world during the Pandemic can be understood in the story told in the novel that starts with three different characters collecting in a hotel room to plot a revolution. Among other things, the dialog below is a masterpiece of virtuosity on the part of a great writer: light and deep at the same time, note how it manages to describe the dialog of three people in a readable way, rarely having to use the clumsy sentences that normal novelists need to use ("he said," or "she quipped,"). And, more than 50 years after it was written, it is still remarkably actual. 

From The Moon is a Harsh Mistress -- 1966, by Robert A. Heinlein

"Now," I said, after we toasted, "Prof, what you think of pennant race? Got money says Yankees can't do it again?" 

"Manuel, what is your political philosophy?" 

"With that new boy from Milwaukee I feel like investing." 

"Sometimes a man doesn't have it defined but, under Socratic inquiry, knows where he stands and why."

 "I'll back 'em against field, three to two." 

"What? You young idiot! How much?" 

"Three hundred. Hong Kong." 

"Done. For example, under what circumstances may the State justly place its welfare above that of a citizen?" 

"Mannie," Wyoh asked, "do you have any more foolish money? I think well of the Phillies." 

I looked her over. "Just what were you thinking of betting?" 

"You go to hell! Rapist." 

"Prof, as I see, are no circumstances under which State is justified in placing its welfare ahead of mine." 

"Good. We have a starting point." 

"Mannie," said Wyoh, "that's a most self-centered evaluation." 

"I'm a most self-centered person." 

"Oh, nonsense. Who rescued me? Me, a stranger. And didn't try to exploit it. Professor, I was cracking not facking. Mannie was a perfect knight." 

"Sans peur et sans reproche. I knew, I've known him for years. Which is not inconsistent with evaluation he expressed." 

"Oh, but it is! Not the way things are but under the ideal toward which we aim. Mannie, the 'State' is Luna. Even though not sovereign yet and we hold citizenships elsewhere. But I am part of the Lunar State and so is your family. Would you die for your family?" 

"Two questions not related." 

"Oh, but they are! That's the point." 

"Nyet. I know my family, opted long ago." 

"Dear Lady, I must come to Manuel's defense. He has a correct evaluation even though he may not be able to state it. May I ask this? Under what circumstances is it moral for a group to do that which is not moral for a member of that group to do alone?" 

"Uh... that's a trick question." 

"It is the key question, dear Wyoming. A radical question that strikes to the root of the whole dilemma of government. Anyone who answers honestly and abides by all consequences knows where he stands-- and what he will die for." 

Wyoh frowned. "'Not moral for a member of the group--'" she said. 

"Professor... what are your political principles?" 

"May I first ask yours? If you can state them?" 

"Certainly I can! I'm a Fifth Internationalist, most of the Organization is. Oh, we don't rule out anyone going our way; it's a united front. We have Communists and Fourths and Ruddyites and Societians and Single-Taxers and you name it. But I'm no Marxist; we Fifths have a practical program. Private where private belongs, public where it's needed, and an admission that circumstances alter cases. Nothing doctrinaire." 

"Capital punishment?" 

"For what?" 

"Let's say for treason. Against Luna after you've freed Luna." 

"Treason how? Unless I knew the circumstances I could not decide." 

"Nor could I, dear Wyoming. But I believe in capital punishment under some circumstances... with this difference. I would not ask a court; I would try, condemn, execute sentence myself, and accept full responsibility." 

"But--Professor, what are your political beliefs?" 

"I'm a rational anarchist." 

"I don't know that brand. Anarchist individualist, anarchist Communist, Christian anarchist, philosophical anarchist, syndicalist, libertarian--those I know. But what's this? Randite?" 

"I can get along with a Randite. A rational anarchist believes that concepts such as 'state' and 'society' and 'government' have no existence save as physically exemplified in the acts of self-responsible individuals. He believes that it is impossible to shift blame, share blame, distribute blame... as blame, guilt, responsibility are matters taking place inside human beings singly and nowhere else. But being rational, he knows that not all individuals hold his evaluations, so he tries to live perfectly in an imperfect world... aware that his effort will be less than perfect yet undismayed by self-knowledge of self failure." 

"Hear, hear!" I said. "'Less than perfect.' What I've been aiming for all my life." 

"You've achieved it," said Wyoh. "Professor, your words sound good but there is something slippery about them. Too much power in the hands of individuals--surely you would not want... well, H-missiles for example--to be controlled by one irresponsible person?" 

"My point is that one person is responsible. Always. If H-bombs exist--and they do--some man controls them. In tern of morals there is no such thing as 'state.' Just men. Individuals. Each responsible for his own acts." 

...

Wyoh plowed doggedly into Prof, certain she had all answers. But Prof was interested in questions rather than answers, which baffled her. Finally she said, "Professor, I can't understand you. I don't insist that you call it 'government'--I just want you to state what rules you think are necessary to insure equal freedom for all." 

"Dear lady, I'll happily accept your rules." 

"But you don't seem to want any rules!" 

"True. But I will accept any rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do." 

"You would not abide by a law that the majority felt was necessary?" 

"Tell me what law, dear lady, and I will tell you whether I will obey it." 

"You wiggled out. Every time I state a general principle, you wiggle out." 

Prof clasped hands on chest. "Forgive me. Believe me, lovely Wyoming, I am most anxious to please you. You spoke of willingness to unite the front with anyone going your way. Is it enough that I want to see the Authority thrown off Luna and would die to serve that end?" 

Wyoh beamed. "It certainly is!" She fisted his ribs--gently--then put arm around him and kissed cheek. "Comrade! Let's get on with it!" 

"Cheers!" I said.