Get Rid of the Institution
by Robert Russo
This weekend’s domestic headlines were dominated by the scandal of a top evangelist who resigned over sex and drugs. With such a regularity of church-related indignities these days one must wonder why people allow an institution where a person has influence over the most core lifestyle of countless others, then admits he is "a deceiver and a liar" once he is caught expecting forgiveness.* It seems no different from mainstream politics except that public office doesn’t normally come with redemption.
It is not a question of what offenses occurred because job approval and standards are a part of everyday life, without unnecessary widespread social repercussions. Human shortcomings and disagreements are universal. It is the fact that this individual was placed in such an influential situation that is the problem. God can be trusted, individuals can be trusted, but an institution cannot be trusted because the boardroom and a long tier of safeguards prevent the decisions, insight or control of one person. It acts with its own mind. It can’t be reasoned with and it can’t be stopped by any one voter.
This condemnation of the individual, viewing him as the source of corruption in a spirit of fairness toward ensuring the common goal stems from our traditional American fear of dictatorship, and a long history of human error being the most newsworthy setbacks to any device or pragmatic goal. To ensure that no individual is a threat to that goal takes from us the rest of our humanity and keeping what was initially one man’s pragmatism from governing itself, uncontrollable. Since all ideas spring from the individual human mind, all modern institutions are merely the evolution of one tycoon’s dream, every science a furthering of one man’s theory. It is almost communist now in its implications, teaching people they have no real say.
In making life easier and more profitable everyone seeks a monopoly, making government the ultimate monopoly. We must evict this delegation and procrastination of our needs, choices and actions. Churchgoers will be better off seeking God directly or through small parishes with no bureaucracy; employees would be more empowered to complete their tasks without someone looking over their shoulder; political groups and even volunteer organizations would be truer to their goals without a national office; and citizens would be better served in totality by local representation, unless that body relinquishes control and serves only as a connection and meeting place to pursue greater causes. If a Democrat or Republican sees no chance of being a major contributor to their party because it has become too big and too cemented in its ways, what good is their being a member?
*http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/05/haggard.allegations/index.html
Send your opinions to henrico@richmondliberty.org.
If you have topics of interest to Libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input!