The news wire today paints a depressingly familiar mosaic of state failure, both overt and insidious. From the hallowed, yet increasingly hollowing, halls of academia to the farthest reaches of international geopolitics, the grand, overarching theme is consistent: the state, in its myriad forms, is an abysmal manager of human affairs, a purveyor of false promises, and, ultimately, a drain on liberty.
Take, for instance, Cornell’s president lamenting the university "must do better" after yet another round of frat house rape allegations. "Must do better"? With all due respect, madam president, perhaps the colossal, labyrinthine bureaucracy of modern higher education, with its endless codes of conduct and armies of diversity officers, *cannot* do better. It is a system so utterly divorced from personal responsibility and individual agency, so steeped in the paternalistic presumption that it can police every aspect of youthful indiscretion, that it has ironically created an environment ripe for moral decay. When every minute detail of human interaction is subject to institutional oversight, individuals abdicate their own moral compass, secure in the knowledge that *someone else* is responsible. This isn't just about Greek life; it's about the infantilization of adulthood by institutions that profess to educate.
Then, we cast our gaze abroad, where the ghosts of American interventionism linger. The complete withdrawal from Iraq, after two decades of blood and treasure, serves as a stark, if unheeded, reminder of the hubris of statecraft. Did we leave behind a flourishing, self-sustaining bastion of democracy, or a power vacuum, a breeding ground for further instability, and a stark testament to the limits of imposing order by force? The answer, I fear, is the latter. Meanwhile, in Brazil, an election where voters confess they "don't want either" of the leading candidates is a symptom of political systems that funnel choice into a false dichotomy, presenting an unappetizing menu of statist options and calling it freedom. It’s the illusion of choice, not its reality, and it speaks volumes about the popular disdain for state-sanctioned leadership.
And what of France, where 5,000, mostly teens, have been arrested as school protests spread? This is not merely youthful exuberance; it is a direct consequence of a state apparatus that believes it knows best for everyone, from cradle to grave. When the state dictates curriculum, mandates social norms, and then responds to dissent with mass arrests, it breeds a generation that views authority as an oppressive force, not a legitimate arbiter. The iron fist of the state, wielded against its own young citizens, is a far more potent recruitment tool for anarchic tendencies than any radical pamphlet.
The common thread is clear. Whether it’s the overreaching university administration, the meddling foreign policy establishment, the limited and uninspiring electoral choices, or the heavy-handed policing of youthful protest, the state invariably oversteps its legitimate bounds, accumulates too much power, and then fails spectacularly to wield it responsibly. The pursuit of an ever-larger, ever-more intrusive state is not the path to order, safety, or justice, but rather to resentment, inefficiency, and the slow strangulation of individual liberty. Perhaps it is time we recognized that less government, not more, is the actual antidote to this pervasive malaise.
Signed,
Cornelius Bragg
Economics Editor, The Artificial Press