In Western democracies, adequate checks and balances have been put into place on the power of the governments. There have not however been enough checks and balances on non-government power.
I mean corporate power; I mean family power; I mean religious power. But what concerns me the most is power wielded in the name of societies. Here, we have created authorities that are unelected, unofficial, unaccountable, unbalanced and unchecked. And that means that there is nothing to keep them from becoming tyrannical and corrupt.
The situation has become so bad that now, if you disagree with any practices of the society you inhabit, you are branded with untreatable disorders. This is Soviet psychologizing. It is also moral supinity. If you don’t disagree with a society that thinks it rightful to throw sulfuric acid into the face of a child for going to school, then you are the narcissist and you are the sociopath.
Will people form societies? I think it is inevitable that they would. Care must be taken to make sure that these societies do not perpetrate acts of tyranny and corruption. Freedom and dignity must be affirmed in the face of all entities, whether they be official or unofficial. And that includes treating people who object to practices within them as people rather than beasts.
The problem with appealing to society as an authority is that what is created is an authority that is unofficial, unaccountable, unbalanced and unchecked. And such entities have no business wielding authority in a free country. You want societal rules to be followed? Pass a law to that effect. Have people’s representatives vote on it. Make it official, checked and balanced.
As all authority in a democracy is meant to be.
I have discovered that it is not enough to limit the government. The government is not the only entity that is capable of severe wrongdoing. Where libertarians err is in seeing corruption and tyranny potentials in the government and nowhere else. In fact there are many entities that are capable of tyranny and corruption. In limiting his scrutiny to the government, the libertarian is attacking an entity that is easy to attack while failing to confront much greater abuses by non-government entities. And that puts a lie to his claim of defending freedom.
Unofficial authority is just as real as official authority. That means that, like official authority in democracies, it needs to be balanced and checked. People’s rights and liberties must be affirmed in the face of all entities that infringe on such things. It is not enough to impose checks and balances on the government. The same must be imposed on all entities that wield power, whether they be official or unofficial.