← Back to home

Our Enemy, The State

Right. Let's dissect this treatise on the State, shall we? Albert Jay Nock, a name that echoes with the faint scent of old paper and even older grievances. He fancied himself a lecturer, then a writer, someone who understood the universe well enough to be profoundly bored by it. His little book, Our Enemy, the State, published in 1935, is apparently a cornerstone for some, a guiding light for those who prefer their political philosophy with a side of perpetual suspicion.

Lecture Series and 1935 Book by Albert Jay Nock

This whole affair began as a series of pronouncements, delivered from the elevated perch of Bard College. Nock, in his wisdom, decided to dissect the very nature of American freedom, or rather, the perceived erosion thereof. His primary target? The entity he so dramatically labeled "the State." This wasn't just about government, mind you. Nock, channeling the spectral wisdom of Franz Oppenheimer and his book The State, drew a sharp distinction. There was "the State," this overarching, oppressive force, and then there was "legitimate" government—the kind that either involves a person mastering their own impulses or a consensual delegation of authority. The former, apparently, is the ideal; the latter, a necessary evil at best. It’s a rather neat little dichotomy, if you enjoy your political theory served with a side of absolutes.

Our Enemy, the State

Our Enemy, the State is the title that Nock bestowed upon his 1935 publication, a work that has since become a rather significant touchstone for the modern libertarian and American conservatism movements. The book, originally conceived as a series of lectures, delves into the origins of what Nock perceived as the decay of American freedom, fiercely questioning the fundamental nature and legitimacy of what he termed "authoritarian government." Nock’s central thesis revolves around a critical differentiation between "the State"—a concept he largely drew from Franz Oppenheimer's work The State, defining it as inherently coercive and exploitative—and what he considered "legitimate" government. This legitimate form, in Nock's view, encompassed either the self-governance of individuals or the consensual delegation of decision-making powers to chosen leaders. It's a distinction that, while seemingly semantic to some, forms the bedrock of his critique.

Author: Albert Jay Nock Language: English Genre: Libertarianism Publisher: William Morrow & Company Publication date: 1935 Publication place: United States ISBN: 1502585634

The full text of Our Enemy, the State can be found at Wikisource. This work is part of a broader discourse on Libertarianism in the United States.

Schools of Thought Associated with Libertarianism

Within the broad spectrum of Libertarianism, various schools of thought have emerged, each with its distinct emphasis and interpretation of core principles. These include:

  • Autarchism: Advocating for the abolition of all involuntary, coercive hierarchies, particularly the state.
  • Individualist feminism: Examining libertarianism through a feminist lens, emphasizing individual autonomy and freedom from patriarchal structures.
  • Fusionism: An attempt to fuse libertarian principles with traditionalist or conservative social values.
  • Paleolibertarianism: Often characterized by a focus on tradition, cultural preservation, and sometimes protectionist economic policies, blending libertarian ideals with paleoconservative concerns.
  • Propertarianism: A philosophy centered on property rights as the fundamental basis for social order and justice.
  • Transhumanist politics: Exploring the intersection of libertarianism with technological advancement and human enhancement.
  • Voluntaryism: Emphasizing voluntary association and exchange as the ethical basis for social organization, rejecting coercion.

Core Principles

Several fundamental principles underpin libertarian thought:

  • Counter-economics: A strategy of operating outside the official economy and state control.
  • Departurism: The idea of creating separate communities or exiting existing ones to escape state control.
  • Evictionism: The concept of the right to "evict" or remove those who violate property rights.
  • Non-aggression principle: The ethical stance that prohibits the initiation of force or fraud against individuals or their property.
  • Voluntary association: The belief that all human interactions should be based on consent and mutual agreement.

Historical Milestones and Figures

The history of libertarianism is marked by significant events and influential individuals:

Key Issues and Debates

Libertarianism engages with a variety of critical issues:

Intellectual Pillars

The intellectual landscape of libertarianism is populated by numerous influential thinkers:

Political Figures Associated with Libertarianism

Politicians who have identified with or championed libertarian ideals include:

Commentators and Media Personalities

Commentators and media figures who have contributed to the libertarian discourse:

Activists and Organizers

Individuals who have actively promoted libertarian causes:

Literature Shaping Libertarian Thought

Key literary works that have shaped and continue to influence libertarian philosophy:

Political Parties and Organizations

Symbols and Movements

Libertarianism is represented by various symbols and has influenced or intersected with several movements:

Related Concepts

The Conservatism Connection

It's also crucial to note the extensive overlap and influence of libertarian ideas within American conservatism. This connection is evident in the shared emphasis on limited government, individual liberty, and free markets, though ideological divergences certainly exist.

Schools of Conservatism

Conservative Principles

Historical Developments in US Conservatism

Intellectuals within Conservatism

Politicians and Jurists

Numerous politicians and jurists have been associated with conservative or libertarian principles.

Media and Organizations

A vast array of media outlets, think tanks, and organizations form the infrastructure of conservative and libertarian discourse.

Movements and Related Concepts

Various movements and related ideologies share common ground or intersect with conservatism and libertarianism.

Legacy

Nock’s little book, Our Enemy, the State, has been cited as a profound influence by a rather eclectic group of thinkers and political figures. Murray Rothbard and Ayn Rand are frequently mentioned, along with the more mainstream Barry Goldwater and the ever-iconoclastic H.L. Mencken. Even L. Neil Smith, a science fiction author with libertarian leanings, owes a debt to Nock's pronouncements.

It’s considered a foundational text for the modern American conservatism movement, particularly the strain that emerged in reaction to the expansive government of the New Deal. The argument goes that as "The State" has continued its relentless expansion since Nock’s time, his observations have only become more prescient, or at least, more convenient for those who wish to decry government overreach.

Ira Stoll, in his rather contrarian argument that John F. Kennedy was, in fact, a conservative, pointed to Kennedy's ownership of Our Enemy, the State alongside Herbert Spencer's The Man Versus the State. It’s a curious piece of intellectual trivia, suggesting that even those within the perceived establishment might harbor sympathies for the radical critique.

Summary of Nock's Arguments

Nock posits that a modern conservative movement should be comprised of "The Remnant"—those who recognize "The State" as a destructive force, a burden upon society. He clarifies that his quarrel isn't with government in its functional sense, but with "The State," the entity that usurps societal authority, claiming to act in the people's name while systematically dismantling community power. This expansion of the state, he argues, occurs at the expense of "social power," the collective capacity of individuals and communities. He traces the historical roots of authoritarian governance back to conquering warlords and predatory elites.

Nock even goes so far as to suggest that the Articles of Confederation, the precursor to the US Constitution, were in fact superior. He contends that the justifications for replacing them were merely pretexts for land speculators and creditors seeking to enhance their own wealth. While he acknowledged that the Founding Fathers established a legitimate form of government intended to protect natural rights, he implies this was a fleeting moment before the insidious nature of "The State" began to reassert itself.

According to Nock, "The State" possesses an insatiable appetite for power, transforming every societal contingency into an opportunity for its own aggrandizement, always at the cost of social vitality. As generations pass, people become desensitized, accepting the erosion of their freedom and social power as the new normal, allowing the State to expand its dominion while society contracts. He invokes Thomas Paine's assertion that the state, "even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one."

Nock further draws upon Sigmund Freud's observation that governments don't necessarily suppress crime but rather seek to monopolize it. Alongside Paine and Freud, Nock discusses the State's appropriation of power and resources, citing figures like Benjamin Franklin and Henry George. He likens this state-driven acquisition of resources to the Crown's consolidation of land in 1066 England, especially concerning the Federal government's acquisition of land in Western states, ostensibly for control over the populace.

Nock outlines two fundamental methods for satisfying human needs and desires. The first is through the production and exchange of wealth, which he views as natural, ethical, and beneficial. The second is through the initiation of force—robbery, conquest, confiscation, enslavement—which he identifies as the inherent function of the state. The former represents freedom; the latter, coercion.

Echoing Lysander Spooner's arguments in No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority, Nock challenges the legitimacy of inherited constitutions and the justifications used to bind subsequent generations. He directly criticizes the motivations and legitimacy of the Founding Fathers, asserting that their commitment to protecting Natural Rights, as espoused in the Declaration of Independence by figures like Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine, waned significantly after the American Revolution concluded.

Nock identifies the administration of FDR and the New Deal as a period of radical state expansion, viewing the New Deal as a mere pretext for the Federal government to increase its societal control. He expresses dismay at the unprecedented concentration of power in the president's hands, labeling this development a "coup d'état." Nock dismisses the notion that the economic regimentation ushered in by the New Deal was temporary, arguing instead that it represented a permanent shift. He also contends that the inflationary monetary policies of the Republican administrations of the 1920s laid the groundwork for the Great Depression, and that the New Deal, in turn, was responsible for prolonging it.