Are You a Thug?

Some people are thugs.  As a practicing criminal defense attorney, I sometimes get to meet and talk with thugs.[1]  Most of the thugs I represent know they are thugs, and some of them are even proud to be thugs.  Most people don’t think of themselves as “thugs.”  This is because most thugs don’t realize they are thugs.  As with most things, the first step to change is an acknowledgment of the facts.  I encourage you to honestly consider whether you are truly a thug.

All human interactions can be boiled down and assigned to one of two possible categories, “voluntary” or “coercive.”  The “voluntary” interaction category includes things like charitable acts, all contractual relations, and most interactions among friends.  A truly “voluntary” interaction is one that is knowingly entered into by competent and consenting adults.  The “coercive” interaction category includes things like theft, assault, fraud, and other old fashioned concepts of criminal activity.  The hallmark of this category is the concept of one person forcing his or her will upon another. delegate the voter’s rights and authority to a politician or other government agent to carry out the voter’s legitimate rights and authority.  As an example, because a voter has a right to self-defense, the voter, as a principal, can legitimately delegate that right to an agent such as a politician or a police officer to properly exercise on the voter’s behalf.

However, a principal can never legitimately delegate rights or authority not possessed by the principal.  Nobody has a legitimate right to aggress against another competent adult.  Therefore, any purported delegation of a right to aggress against a peaceful competent adult is illegitimate.  A voter simply does not have a legitimate right to control the assets of another competent adult such as his or her neighbor.  As an example, when a voter votes to coercively ban smoking in a restaurant owned by the voter’s neighbor, such vote is an act of thuggery because it seeks to wrongfully control the property of another; a right not possessed by the voter and therefore beyond the legitimate scope of the delegation.  While voting against such action is not thuggery, voting for it is acting as a thug.[4]

Evaluating the mens rea is also important to determine whether a person is an accomplice to thuggery or simply being coerced by thugs.  As I have previously stated, voluntarily supporting and aiding people who work for the government to engage in acts of thuggery is also acting as a thug.  However, being coerced into aiding isn’t being a thug at all.  As an example, almost everyone who earns income in the United States is coerced into sending some of their money to people working for the government.  That people comply with the tax system to diminish the possibility of audits, penalties, seizures and possibly prosecution does not make them accomplices to thuggery.  They are simply victims of thuggery.

Not all uses of force constitute thuggery.[5]  It is important to note that employing force to defend against thuggery is not itself thuggery, but rather justified self-defense.[6]  People who encourage and support only voluntary transactions between consenting adults and abhor coercion are not necessarily pacifists and need not be resolved victim status.  As an example, shooting and killing a crazed gun toting lunatic poised to murder innocent people is certainly an act of heroism not thuggery.  Unfortunately, there will always be people who initiate violence against others.  Preventing them from acting, even by employing force, is heroic.  It is the initiation of force, coercion or fraud that qualifies as thuggery and ought to be abolished.

Those of us who support a free society believe we can live peacefully and prosperously without coercing our fellow peaceful humans in any way.  We truly are clever and sophisticated enough to devise ways to interact with each other to live successfully without imposing our will on our neighbors by force, coercion or fraud.  There is no reason to cave in to short-sighted approaches that resolve to coercive means of achieving our desired ends simply because we can’t yet envision achieving our goals through peaceful methods.

Said another way, peaceful and civilized people acknowledge and respect the rights of other competent adults to live however they wish so long as they don’t coerce others.  All peaceful and civilized people ought to aspire to eliminate all coercion from our world with the confidence we can still function effectively as humans to each enjoy and fulfill our lives.  Supporting coercion and thuggery perpetuates and encourages violence and conflict in our world.  It is long past time we loudly speak out against all forms of coercion against competent and peaceful adults.

The solution to many of our societal ills is to simply respect the rights of other peaceful and competent adults to run their lives as they see fit; even if we disagree with their peaceful and sometimes foolish choices.  The enemy of a free society is coercion against peaceful competent adults.  Just as the free market cannot be predicted, neither can the form and structure of a free society.  A free society is simply one in which peaceful and competent adults control their property and run their own lives.

The varied forms and structure such a society could take is restricted only by our own imaginations and creativity.  Imagine a world where independent communities can each freely experiment with rules, laws, structures, institutions, or the absence of these things, all with the goal of eradicating coercion against peaceful competent adults.  Only a market of free people can decide for themselves what works best for them.  If we truly cherish and desire freedom and peace, this ought to be our goal.

As a final thought, observe that “persuasion” and “coercion” are entirely different creatures.  Some of us who support only voluntary transactions feel entirely free to attempt to persuade others to adopt all varieties of views.  In fact, a free society always benefits from a vigorous and highly competitive marketplace of ideas.  Advocating only voluntary transactions doesn’t mean that speaking out loudly against or for any particular view is prohibited.  Indeed, it ought to be strongly encouraged.

The difference between the voluntary group and the coercion group is that if the idea isn’t persuasive enough to be voluntarily adopted, the voluntary group ultimately respects the sovereignty of other humans to decide for themselves what views to adopt.  In contrast, the thugs use brute force and coercion to impose their unpersuasive views on others.  A free society is only possible when we identify and convince enough thugs to abandon their uncivilized views and adopt a freedom and peace promoting voluntaryist view.  Don’t be a thug!

Notes

[1] Thanks to the idiotic drug war and ridiculous DUI laws, the vast majority of my criminal clients are nice peaceful people who do not violate the rights of others.

[2] For purposes of this article, my use of “coercion” or “coercive” is also intended to encompass all forms of violence and fraud.

[3] I’m not prepared to label you a “thug” merely because you have previously, on rare occasions, engaged in thuggery.  Similarly, that a person previously committed an immoral act doesn’t necessarily mean such person is immoral.  Nobody is perfect.  However, when conduct becomes pervasive, you have earned the title.

[4] Many people simply ignore or refuse to participate at all in the political process.  Of course, people are free to participate or refuse to participate.  Whether one participates in the political process is an act of symbolism in any event.  Real change does not come from the political process.  Real change occurs when enough people change their hearts and minds.  Although the political process can be used as a catalyst for this change, there are countless other effective ways to reach and influence hearts and minds.

[5] Parents using reasonable and necessary force to protect their children or otherwise act in their best interests are certainly not thugs.  Nor are property owners thugs because they seek to control their own property.  This article is focused on interactions between consenting adults.

[6] Justified self-defense always presupposes a proportional response to an imminent threat or use of unjustified physical force or coercion.  It is always advisable to avoid the use of all force even in self-defense if possible.  Peaceful civilized people do not relish an opportunity to use force.  It ought to be a last resort.

The post Are You a Thug? appeared first on LewRockwell.