I suspect that many of you already know what I’m about to say and probably worked it out ages ok, but sometimes I’m a bit slow on the uptake. I’d like to claim that it’s because what I’ve finally realised is so insane is so bonkers that I haven’t previously been able to believe it. However this morning I suddenly had an insight into the mind of the statist (at least of the left wing kind). I was reading an article over on vice defending the Hypocrite Mr Brand when one of the comments suddenly made something make sense. Whilst I still find it hard to believe I’ve finally realised that all those statists we see campaigning against cuts and for more taxes do actually 100% believe that:
the state forcing people to help each other is a better thing that people voluntarily helping each other.
This still seems utterly insane to me, I could understand it if they felt the state was best placed to help other people and would make a better job of it – I’d think they were wrong and quite mad but I could understand it. I could even well understand that they think that people wouldn’t help each other unless forced to – I think that’s a very depressing view of the world but I could understand it and the champagne socialists do tend to support it. No both of those views would make some sort of sense, but that isn’t what they think they do actually honestly believe that it is better that the state force people to help each other (after taking it’s cut) than people just help each other.
This to me explains why they get so wound up about food banks or homeless charities and all the other voluntary ways people try to help each other out. Hell it may even explain why they thing people can’t be trusted, after all if the state is the best way to help each other then everyone just lending a hand directly is undermining the benevolence of the state. That is the difference and it’s what I could never understand before I think we should be asking why does the state do so much, why aren’t we demanding that charities do more that we’re left alone to help each other, that the state stop interfering and starts leaving us with the resources to help each other – they think if the state isn’t doing it then it’s a problem.
It may well be they’ve been taught this, that the state is father and mother and they can never let go of the apron strings. The state knows best and anyone that questions that is a danger, I’m sure I’ve read that in more than one bit of sci-fi and it’s a terrifying mind set, but at least I’ve finally realised they do actually think that way. Not sure if that makes me despair all the more or if it maybe gives me a way to understand them and thus talk to them to try to persuade them that they’re wrong. But at the very least I at least now have some inkling of the gulf of thought that lies between us.