Nostr Web Client

It doesn’t matter how “good” the people you elect are... government cannot and should not be in the business of legislating morality.

You can’t fix culture with coercion. You can’t mandate virtue at gunpoint. You can’t vote your way to a more moral society by giving power to people who believe they have the right to control others.

A just society doesn’t require top-down enforcement of “the good.” It requires freedom and the personal responsibility that comes with it.

Let churches teach values. Let communities build norms. Let families raise children. But stop pretending the state is a moral compass. It’s a blunt weapon, not a guiding light.

Liberty over control. Always.

🖊️: Libertarian Party

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

FL Justin 6mo ago

You can't legislate kindness. It is taught and nurtured daily

William ₿ Travis 6mo ago

I've never understood this argument. I agree that you cannot mandate virtue, but you can and should use the law to protect life, liberty and property, all of which are expressions of morality.

Economista Austriaco 6mo ago

There can be laws without central government.

William ₿ Travis 6mo ago

That doesn't address the issue of legislating morality. Even a local govt can and should pass laws protecting life, liberty, and property. What's the difference? Clearly more non-legal levers exist locally to promote the good, but a legal structure promises to the people that society, however small, will be there for them when injustice is committed.

Noisy signal 6mo ago

You've lost me.

Is the law to protect life, liberty and property working today?

Charles Hugh Smith makes an analysis called The Hollowed Out System that shows the complete opposite .

William ₿ Travis 6mo ago

Well, then it sounds like I could learn something from his book. I'm not arguing for a centralized state, but I am not convinced society can hold together without rule of law. At some level society must be organized in a way that conveys to all what the rules are and the consequences for breaking them. Maybe I lack the sophistication or experience to understand the argument.

jtown 6mo ago

I think you're taking it too much at face value. The way I understand the quote is that all the laws in the world won't save a morally collapsing society. The morals are built from the bottom up, they cannot be enforced from the top down. Trying to enforce them through a tyrannical method will only collapse them further and faster.

jtown 6mo ago

If the society/government is making prudent and sound decisions for the health and long term success of the society as a whole. Individuals will be more optimistic and prudent themselves. The reverse is also true as we see ourselves. The morality will naturally be a result of those decisions. Not a fat lawbook.

William ₿ Travis 6mo ago

That makes sense to me. And I wasn't suggesting that laws can save a collapsing society. I was thinking more about the early stages where the people have an internal moral code that is reinforced by law so that those who don't follow their internal guidance will be held accountable and hopefully correct their actions.

jtown 6mo ago

Forsure, and I agree. Even in the most morally sound society I think there will still be odd cases of bad individuals breaking those moral codes. I just think it's about moving the average moral code of most into unity. Anyway love your content

Kayne 6mo ago

Read Gaddafi's green book, learn the truth about how direct democracy worked in Libya prior to the invasion and destruction of their society by NATO and the gulf Arab states.