A Police State, No Less

Kashmir is under curfew.

Shoot-at-sight orders have been imposed in Orissa.

And West Bengal has come to a grinding halt.

In all these cases, the escalation of disorder has been caused primarily by The State favouring one group while alienating another.

In Kashmir, Hindus were given 100 acres of forest land.

In West Bengal, Tata Motors were given 1,000 acres of land, unjustly.

In Orissa, the root cause is disaffection amongst a tribe that covets ST preferential policies.

In the meantime, a World Bank study finds India doing worse than Africa – including sub-Saharan Africa.

And from the Naxal badlands there is news that they are growing ganja – and selling it for a pittance.

Whatever happened to "natural order"?

Very simple: The State does not have the foggiest notion of the principles underlying good government. None of its policies favour the commonweal. And when things go wrong, the jackboots step in to crush protest. We are not a "rule of law society." We are more or less a "police state." All police action by The State is arbitrary and discriminatory. Things cannot continue such.

There is a world of difference between a rule of law society and "democracy." In the former, The Law is uppermost. In the latter, there is Unlaw – because the democracy is guided by theories of "social justice." These necessarily mean taking from Ram to give to Shyam. In a rule of law society, there is an "equal justice" and each individual is protected, along with his properties and his liberties.

Some of you may have tuned in to my last podcast on natural order. And the events unfolding in Kashmir, Bengal and Orissa may have convinced you that no such natural order can possibly exist in India. Do tune in to my next podcast, which will deal with The Law in a rule of law society.

As far as "social justice" is concerned, do note that the World Bank study referred to above finds more than 76 percent of our people living under 2 US dollars a day. Actually, most backpacker western tourists in India live on 2 dollars a day, or less – excluding room rent. This figure is meaningless in an undercapitalized country. Yet it does show that "social justice" cannot lift the masses out of poverty. 24 per cent of the population cannot be expected to earn enough to give to 76 per cent. It would be more expedient to allow the 24 per cent to keep their money, to save and invest, and thereby generate commercial energy that will offer economic opportunities to the lesser-off.

This means The Law must protect property. This means "social justice" must be abandoned. Justice must be equal and immutable.

And there must be Liberty – so that all, including the Naxals growing ganja, must be free to create wealth for themselves, and to keep that wealth too.

Only then will the "natural order" prevail: when everyone understands full well that The State does not grant favours. And that the only means of survival are through catallactic exchanges in The Market.

Do tune in to my next podcast, scheduled for Saturday the 30th, in which I will outline The Law.