The notion of state

By Albion Tusha

The notion of state is there to protect each and every one of us. However, it has not always been like that. For thousands of years, the state has been, very simply put, an organization that extorted the lower classes.  To think of that today, especially in western societies, might be hard to conceptualize for many. To fully understand this extortion scheme, one must go to the beginning of the notion of the state. 

This organized form of a political community under one ruling body commenced when our migratory ancestors settled on lands. After our ancestors switched from migratory to territorial humans, this abstract notion started to gain importance. Everyone owned something, either individually or collectively. Thus, territory became exponentially more important.  Just like most living things on our planet, we humans are social beings, which means that the collaboration of the community is crucial in achieving common goals. Despite this, the existence of the community is not solely harmonious; often, there are conflicts between members of the community. Conflicts are usually emotionally driven. Some members of the community are more ambitious than others, some simply want a peaceful life, others are seeking to gain dominance over the community. 

As the millennia have passed, funnily enough, many of the conflicts have remained the same. Men have been fighting for thousands of years for certain things. Historically, they have fought each other because of a woman, a piece of land, a broken deal, ideology, religion, conflicting values, and, most importantly, social dominance. Ambitious men became leaders solely for their personal gain. Leadership meant and still often means getting the best things life has to offer. The issue with most of history has stood with these ambitious individuals who have been willing to do anything to achieve their ultimate goal. Morality has not been the main concern for most of them. Going back to the birth of civilizations, it were the most ruthless, violent, and callous men who managed to get on top of the social hierarchy. By today’s standards, most of these men would be condemned as criminals, yet it were these criminals who founded the state.

Back then, there were no crimes as there was no law. Without a standardized means of measuring what is right and what’s not, communities had to rely on two main concepts. The first concept was that everyone was out there for themselves; if you can’t protect yourself, too bad, no one will help you. Therefore, when conflicts arose, only individuals themselves could solve them. The second concept was that of the leader, an individual, not necessarily moral, who would solve the disputes between men. It is this belief in a third party that is the first foundation of the notion of the state. Rather than handling conflict themselves, humans chose to find someone else to solve it for them. Naturally, this position gave power to the immoral leaders who were willing to abuse it. Civilization started to advance, and the Mesopotamians, Egyptians, Assyrians, Minoans, and many more all around the globe started to form the first kingdoms as we know them. This system of kingdoms proceeded to exist for thousands of years; even today, we can see the remains of that system. The ambitious, immoral men had created their dynasties which had slowly increased their power over the common folk. Leaders continued to solve conflicts and disputes, and they got incredibly wealthy doing this. 

The common folk, throughout generations, had involuntarily gifted their leaders their freedom. When civilization began as we know it, the common individual voluntarily subordinated himself to a central authority. The supreme authority gave the individual security but, in the process, took away parts of their freedom. At first glance, it looks like a great deal. The thing is that authority is, by nature, corruptible. Gifting your freedom to a possibly abusive, easily corruptible entity can be a frightening decision. When a deal is struck, two parties agree to it on the basis of equal gain. However, in longer timespans, the terms of the deal might change, and one party may stand to lose. History has proven that the central authorities to which humanity has entrusted parts of their personal freedom, have abused their power at the behest of human lives. At first, the smaller aspects of personal freedom are retracted, but as time passes, more and more important aspects of personal liberties are withdrawn. In the name of security, authorities will find ways to take away individuals’ freedom. As Irving Layton put it: “The average man does not want to be free, he simply wants to be safe”. 

In this time, slavery was born; paradoxically, it was created by the authority meant to protect the population. Slavery was a tool by the ambitious leaders to control and use the common people.  It was the first step toward a millennia-long extortion. By having to surrender to the terms of a deal made by their ancestors, the slaves had to respect the authority that was abusing them. Despite theoretically having the manpower to fight, the slaves believed in the abstract notion of their governing authority. There have been many societies where slaves have vastly outnumbered their masters, yet they have obliged to their orders. For them, being safe (and alive) was often more important than being free. The capability to rebel existed, but not the willpower to do so. The sheer amount of people would have ensured a victory, though at the cost of many lives. 

Similarly, today, we exchange many of our personal freedoms for security and safety. However, our situation  differs from that of slaves, of course.  Yet, in our own way, we are “chained” to our belief in the state and any other form of authority. What many people are lacking is a proper understanding, and without understanding, there will always be ignorance. Ignorance will ultimately lead to obedience. To quote Aldous Huxley: “Understanding comes when we liberate ourselves from the old and so make possible a direct, unmediated contact with the new, the mystery, moment by moment of our existence”.

Authority is bizarre, it may be in the hands of an entity or in the hands of a single individual. When authority is in the hands of a single individual, that person will slowly be perceived as an entity and less as a human. When men believe in an authority, they will tend to think of it as sublime. As you may have noticed, those men who governed us throughout the years have had the same characteristics. If we study the biographies of historical figures, it will be easy to see that what they did was disgustingly driven by self-gain and nothing more. Pharaohs created a cult of worship just so they could be untouchable; Caeser came into power by using thugs to sabotage elections; the papal states governed by the Pope who was the greediest extorter on human history; Genghis Khan slaughtered a big chunk of the world’s population; Napoleon wanted to create an absolute dictatorship for all of Europe, and the list goes on. A mythical cloud surrounds the names of these rulers despite committing horrible deeds, and people worship their deeds. When freedom was handed to the first leaders on a golden plate, humanity made a deal with the devil. In exchange for their security, they would swear allegiance to the authority of a ruler.  These men are transformed into idols after they die despite facing many challenges during their lifetimes. Once a man dies, his deeds become greater, and they become the standard by which men will measure themselves with. The cult of idols has been bred into us for years, and history has created a need for an idol, each era has one. Historians go as far as naming eras after individuals, such as the Napoleonic era. As time passed, humans forgot that it was them who swore fealty. Humanity created a cult around authority, and it forgot that this authority exists only because of the inability of their ancestors to handle conflicts. Paradoxically, humans were no longer fighting inside their communities, but were instead fighting other faraway communities for causes they barely understood. Authority was created to avoid conflict, but now authority was the one seeking conflict. In Brave New World , a phrase sums it all up, as long as men worship Caesars and Napoleons, Caesars and Napoleons will rise and make men miserable.

I want you to imagine yourself as a simple farmer. Do not think of a time, place, culture, or religion. You are illiterate, uneducated, and the only thing you know in this world is your farm, family, and land. One day, an armed group of people comes to your land telling you that the new local ruler demands tribute. You simply give it to them as there is little you can do to defend yourself. They also ask you to pick up arms and join a group of people to fight for a cause you barely understand. Remember that you have lived on a farm your entire life, so you do not know what is happening. You do not have the knowledge or experience to understand what is going on, so you oblige to the group of men who exert authority. You are stripped away of your farm life and suddenly find yourself a soldier in a foreign land that you know nothing of. You are inexperienced, young, illiterate, and confused about what is happening. You are likely going to die fighting in this war simply because you are subjugated to the demands of an authority. You never had the possibility to learn about the way of things, maybe you had a talent in a certain field, but now is too late as you have been dragged into a conflict that your ancestors brought you in when they swore fealty to a ruler.  

What I just described has been the life of many individuals throughout history, regardless of place and time. Authority has proven to be destructive, yet authority is what keeps us together as a functioning society. In the last years, self-gain has become less important to rulers but still serves as the main influencer to their actions.  On a more positive note, the ambitious leaders who rule our worlds (politicians) have somehow all learned that self-gain can only take you so far.  Today’s politicians are often motivated by ideals rather then material gain and self-gain. This may be even truer for our times as many rulers in the last 100 years came into power believing in ideals and not in personal gain, but this came because of a change of the political systems. However, ideals, no matter how abstract, can also serve as a tool for self-gain despite that gain not necessarily being material. Think of Hitler, who managed to turn Germany from one of the most successful societies in Europe to a war machine in only 15 years; he was driven by ideals. Leaders pride themselves on achievements accomplished under their rule. Pride is, by nature, driven by ego and, therefore, represents some sort of gain. The average German who was conscripted was more concerned with his own survival rather than the goals of his leader. This type of charismatic but dangerous leader is concerned with prestige, not the betterment of the country they rule. Today’s rulers are less motivated by self-gain, but they do what previous leaders did as they share many of the same “prestigious” motivations. 

Everyone should be careful in trusting, serving, and obliging to an authority unconditionally, no matter how good it may seem. History has proven that every system is just one ambitious politician away from total disaster, so we are only left to wonder; how far does society stand from the arrival of another ambitious, ill-intentioned politician. 

I would like to end this piece with a saying; If we do not understand our history, we are doomed to repeat it.

Edited by Indra Schieferbein, artwork by Mira Kurtovic