THE RATIONAL STATE: A Discussion of Government

By Rev. J.J. Purcell

Each independent nation and nation-state, as well as any government organized under every independent nation or nation-state, takes on the character of a human being, as it demonstrates character, thrift, concern for others and lesser traits too – like arrogance, impunity and rashness, among others.

It should be the goal of nations and governments to espouse what is best in people and to operate as the ‘rational state’ that could be equated to a well-balanced human individual, who possesses and demonstrates many good and favorable traits and habits during their daily interactions with others. Inasmuch as a state should be rational, it can be assumed that such a state is truthful, well-meaning, industrious, fair natured and analytical. For example, a rational state could not be one bent upon war, corruption or unsavory motives. The inertial drive for the rational state comes from a place of positive choices, which translate into not only the greater good but the inherent morality that is presumed upon any sane, rational and well-balanced man or woman.

However, even rational states can find themselves in predicaments involving war, corruption and unsavory scandals. It should not be, though, a presentiment of the state to involve itself in base actions.

The rational state understands it has a compact with its citizens: The state shall work in the best interests of the greatest number of individuals that hold allegiance to the state. So, it should be able to be presumed that every decision relative to state finances, security, civil rights, industry and business should be meted out with the understanding that government must be partisan to the interests of the largest number of citizens.

Where does morality come into play with state craft? And, if it does, whose morality should come into play? Is morality even a function of government? I think these are wonderful questions because they are relative to the spoken and unspoken agreements between the citizenry and the government(s) that exercise legal authority over them.

Parts of morality are senses of truth and justice. If a citizen cannot believe the truth asserted by the government, or its ability to fairly mete out justice then there will be a fundamental disconnect between the government and its credibility, which is the ability for it to be believed, and its citizens.

If my neighbor came over and asked to borrow a lawnmower and said he had to mow his front yard, I would lend it to him. He asked me to borrow the lawnmower and informed me he would mow his front yard. As a neighbor of his, I want him to mow the grass on his front lawn, because then that improves the presentation of the block upon which we both live. So, his work is a reflection of my pride in my community also, and I am using my own possession – the lawnmower – to help in achieving that mutual goal. However, as the weeks passed, if I noticed that my neighbor’s lawn was not mowed, I would be interested in that because he borrowed my possession to achieve the work that was not done. Then, I might go and ask my neighbor for my lawnmower back. Well, he might say he had no idea what I was talking about because he never promised to mow the lawn and neither did he borrow my lawnmower. This would give me the impression that my neighbor was both a thief and a liar. After this situation, it would not be logical or reasonable for me to transact any business with my neighbor because I could not count on his word.

Government is not so removed from the neighbor who borrowed the lawnmower. If government compels the citizenry for money, with a stated purpose, and then does not use the money for the reason it stated -- and refuses to acknowledge responsibility for the funds it has acquired -- then government is a thief and a liar. Consequently, I do not see any further reason, according to logic and common sense, to transact any additional business with government. However, because government has armies, courts and police forces, I am compelled to accept the government’s lies, distorted vision and thievery. This is in direct contrast to logic and good sense, which no longer can be applied to the situation or its future outcome. Government cannot do business on its word, only through its courts, police and armies. And, because of this, government would be considered ‘irrational,’ as it would have expectations that are non-linear or credible in dealing with the citizenry. Only an irrational person must use courts, police and armies transact their business. Where right and logic is not in use, then force must be used. It is the road of least resistance.

Now, back to the character of nations and governments: If a government cannot be trusted to observe the truth or to act in the best interests of its citizens then it will not be believed and lose its place in the minds and hearts of people as a force for good. Yet, once that is lost, all is lost. In such a case, government would be plowing over its citizenry irrationally, insensibly and without the ability to right itself, since the foundation of a lie cannot hold up a structure of truth. When all is lost, as in this case, human beings revert to lies, half-truths and deceptions in many instances, and this can be applied to governments as well.

It is harder to operate government with credibility than it is to operate government without credibility among its citizens. The ability to remain credible holds hands with the idea of the rational state that operates sanely.

Now the question must be asked: Who is this government and whom does it represent? What are the ideals of its people? What is their morality?

A government must decide if it is rooted in the welfare of its citizens, and to a lesser extent the world in general. Through its actions, positive and negative, government will create a face to the world and a face to its citizens. If the morality of the government cannot be aligned with the view of morality common to its citizens then it must make a facade -- a false face -- so that it can transact business with convenience.

Men and women deserve to be protected from the excesses of government. Through taxation and the payment of said taxes by citizens, citizens become the responsibility of the government. Government exists only because of levied taxes.

A nation can be mighty and immoral. A man or woman can be mighty and immoral. However, it is a condition of man that, for every person who believes they are the strongest, there is always someone stronger, somewhere. However, a government that can stand up morally and in solidarity with the true welfare of its citizens, and is mighty, is mightier because of its relationship to its citizenry. For this to take place, though, government must behave rationally, in service to its obligations and expectations by its citizens.