Two arguments for the elimination of worry about your liberties, pt. 1

I'm decreasingly worried about the erosion of my liberties, civil or otherwise. Here are two arguments for why you should be decreasingly worried about yours.

The erosion of individuals' liberties is inevitable.

For this argument, I make one key assumption, which is that national states have a natural life cycle similar to that of living organisms. Perhaps you already agree with this. Personally, I find it hard to read history and not think of states as living things, what with their continual rises and falls, their dynamicism and responsiveness.

If you accept the proposition that nations undergo life cycles similar to living organisms then I think you must also accept that your liberties will inevitably be eroded.

The reason for this has to do with that the growth of a living organism necessarily correlates with an increase in its overall, systemic complexity, and systemic complexity itself is defined, in part, by an increase in the heterogeneity of the parts composing the whole. A whole thing cannot be made more complex without either making some of its parts more different from each other or else grouping existing parts in ways to create substructures with new, emergent characteristics. An organism in its first stages of life comprises a small number of cells that are all similar to each other in both form and function, and the organism's capacity for adaptation is limited. As the organism grows, cells differentiate and acquire distinct forms and functions. For example, some cells become skin or nerves; some others become the intestines or pancreas. In all cases, this differentiation allows the organism greater potential for adaptation to its environment but only at the cost of the individual parts becoming more specialized, more limited in the scope of their behavior. A cell once specialized into a skin cell cannot change into a pancreatic cell.

So it is with the state. We individuals are the cells and tissues of the state, and the state uses us through a hegemony of specialization into highly functional parts who are each increasingly dependent upon the whole for their survival. If you don't believe this then try to earn a better living by employing only generalized skills and no specialized ones. The whole has use only for a small number of well rounded parts that are capable of all or most functions; it needs most of its parts to be capable of doing one or a few functions and doing them exceedingly well. So it is with us.

The principal benefit we as individuals gain from this arrangement is improved odds of survival because our host system is more robust and adaptable then we are as individuals; the principal cost we suffer is a decreased flexibility in our choices for how to live our lives. This is a necessary trade-off.

It is common for an individual to ignore the benefit and to look only at the cost. Some people see the politicians, lawyers, and bureaucrats--a sort of nervous system--as imposing upon their freedom to live as they wish. Some people see the military, law enforcement, censures, and tax collection agencies--a sort of immune system--as similarly imposing. Of course they're imposing! That's their role. If our nation host didn't possess brain and immunity, which are two features ubiquitous to complex organisms, then surely it would not be responsive to its international environment nor would it be capable of warding off infection, either exogenous or endogenous.

As individuals, many of us flock to large cities knowing that we lose many of our freedoms by doing so but also knowing that we gain greater potential to prosper through our labors. I as a software developer do well for myself by applying my trade, but I do so only under the umbrella of protection and stability afforded to me by my society. In return my behaviors are limited, and I am not as free in thought or action as a hermit. Though, if I were responsible for my own constant protection as well as supplying my every need, as the hermit is, then my specialized skill of developing software would be nigh worthless. Similarly, a pancreas cell suddenly thrust into the world outside the body would find itself unequipped to procure its own survival; it's beautifully specialized skills of hormone production would be nigh worthless.

My nation host currently affords me a degree of freedom that is sufficient. Some people would have me focus on the half-empty portion, though, and concern myself with the delta, the decrease in my freedom over time. These people ignore that my nation host is young yet and continuing to develop into full maturity and that our increasing rigid social and political structure is a natural byproduct of that growth.