The Anatomy of the State Paperback – July 12, 2016

“In the present more secular age, the divine right of the State has been supplemented by the invocation of a new god, Science. State rule is now proclaimed as being ultrascientific, as constituting planning by experts.’’Rothbard writing in 1974. He just . . . nailed it!“ But while “reason” is invoked more than in previous centuries, this is not the true reason of the individual and his exercise of free will; it is still collectivist and determinist, still implying holistic aggregates and coercive manipulation of passive subjects by their rulers.’’I find this insightful. The use of ‘reason’ has changed into ‘trust us’.“The increasing use of scientific jargon has permitted the State’s intellectuals to weave obscurantist apologia for State rule that would have only met with derision by the populace of a simpler age. A robber who justified his theft by saying that he really helped his victims, by his spending giving a boost to retail trade, would find few converts; but when this theory is clothed in Keynesian equations and impressive references to the “multiplier effect,” it unfortunately carries more conviction. And so the assault on common sense proceeds, each age performing the task in its own ways.’’Rothbard is just so much fun!I’m reminded of the story in book of Acts . . .“On a set day, Herod clothed himself with royal raiment and sat down on the judgment seat and began giving them a public address. Then the people who were assembled began shouting: “A god’s voice, and not a man’s!” Instantly the angel of Jehovah struck him, because he did not give the glory to God, and he was eaten up with worms and died.’’Now, this only occasion where angel acts against ruler directly. Maybe, at this beginning of Christianity, the lesson that political rulers are not gods, not to be worshipped, prepared Christians for the conflict with the Roman Empire.Rothbard explains something I’ve wondered . . .“The majority must be persuaded by ideology that their government is good, wise and, at least, inevitable, and certainly better than other conceivable alternatives. Promoting this ideology among the people is the vital social task of the “intellectuals.” For the masses of men do not create their own ideas, or indeed think through these ideas independently; they follow passively the ideas adopted and disseminated by the body of intellectuals. The intellectuals are, therefore, the “opinion-molders” in society. And since it is precisely a molding of opinion that the State most desperately needs, the basis for age-old alliance between the State and the intellectuals becomes clear.’’This alliance of intellectuals and politics makes sense for this reason. Obvious. Now.However . . .“It is evident that the State needs the intellectuals; it is not so evident why intellectuals need the State.’’Right.“Put simply, we may state that the intellectual’s livelihood in the free market is never too secure; for the intellectual must depend on the values and choices of the masses of his fellow men, and it is precisely characteristic of the masses that they are generally uninterested in intellectual matters.’’More and more this happening. Well . . .“The State, on the other hand, is willing to offer the intellectuals a secure and permanent berth in the State apparatus; and thus a secure income and the panoply of prestige. For the intellectuals will be handsomely rewarded for the important function they perform for the State rulers, of which group they now become a part.’’Intellectuals become rulers!He provides famous historical example . . .“The alliance between the State and the intellectuals was symbolized in the eager desire of professors at the University of Berlin in the nineteenth century to form the ‘intellectual bodyguard of the House of Hohenzollern.’”Worth remembering how this ‘alliance’ resulted in the German disasters of the twentieth century.ContentsWhat the State Is NotWhat the State IsHow the State Preserves ItselfHow the State Transcends Its LimitsWhat the State FearsHow States Relate to One AnotherHistory as a Race Between State Power and Social PowerOn dissent . . .“The greatest danger to the State is independent intellectual criticism; there is no better way to stifle that criticism than to attack any isolated voice, any raiser of new doubts, as a profane violator of the wisdom of his ancestors. Another potent ideological force is to deprecate the individual and exalt the collectivity of society. For since any given rule implies majority acceptance, any ideological danger to that rule can only start from one or a few independently-thinking individuals.’’Think of the Christian persecution by the Romans.“The new idea, much less the new critical idea, must needs begin as a small minority opinion; therefore, the State must nip the view in the bud by ridiculing any view that defies the opinions of the mass. “Listen only to your brothers” or “adjust to society” thus become ideological weapons for crushing individual dissent. By such measures, the masses will never learn of the nonexistence of their Emperor’s clothes.It is also important for the State to make its rule seem inevitable.’’These slices provide example of Rothbard’s style. Clear, trenchant, incisive and persuasive.For some. Others . . .This short work of 54 pages explains much.Undoubtedly can produce various reactions - joy/anger, relief/frustration, insight/rejection.Forty-four notes (linked)Excellent references!Index (not linked)

Excellently broken down and enlightening on our current state of affairs in the United States. Important for so many to read to really understand politics and the government.

This is not a book on the organizations of government and who does what. It is a concise and cutting analysis of State power, and the governed that watch it grow more massive with each passing day.Rothbard begins quickly and builds on his premise that the State gains at the expense of the individual. He finds excellent examples to make a fine point. Here are two of my favorites:1. "Since most men tend to love their homeland, the identification of that land and its people with the State was a means of making natural patriotism work to the State's advantage."Consider how you might think about citizens of a country based on it's head of state. When the government identifies a "regime" that is opposed to it's well-being, we - the collective people - typically show our patriotism by supporting our government and policies that must be implemented to protect us.2. "We may test the hypothesis that the State is largely interested in protecting itself rather than its subjects by asking: which category of crimes does the State pursue and punish most intensely - those against private citizens or those against itself?"This got right to the point: the government looks out for itself, just like you look out for you and your family and property. The difference between the two is that the government has the ability to punish and expand its resources as it feels necessary. You, as an individual, do not.To sum up: if you are reading this, chances are you are looking to know more about political history and power, economics, or libertarian viewpoints in general. For any of these purposes, I think you would be wise to consider this 60 page book. It is a fast, intelligent read that will likely help you critically analyze other policies and political ideologies from the standpoint of the State vs. the people. This book is an overview and highlights the big picture; no background in economics or political science is necessary.

I love this quick read. Its concise, and completely dissects and explains the power of the state.

Rothbard presents compelling arguments backed by historical evidence. Two things I appreciated about the book are (1) how concise and to the point it is, and (2) its review and assessment of ideas and arguments by other important thinkers, particularly John C. Calhoun and Charles Black, Jr. The book is 55 pages in total and the ideas are seemingly becoming more improtant with time.