The chaos of 10,000 laws
Blazing Reader,
Continuing from yesterday's post, my son and I have listened to more of Will Dove's interview with the founders of the United Freedom Party of Alberta, Luke Denis and Chris Hampton, where they make another important point:
Once a government focuses on objective freedom instead of subjective virtue, you don't need thousands of laws to run society.
Or even Ten Commandments.
You just need one: Do no harm to others.
All court cases then would not be about proving whether someone broke a specific law, but whether they caused undue harm to another person, group or nature.
Hardly a Lord of the Flies scenario. Instead, I'd argue that our current legal system — based on perceived virtue — has brought us a "Lord of the Lies" situation.
For example, if businesses stayed open during lockdown, they were fined or jailed — not because they did any harm but because they broke a law. No court in the world could prove they did harm. But they could easily prove they broke a law.
Now, I'm not saying that this alone would make for a great society. Harmlessness is hardly a virtue. But defending freedom is.
Freedom would be the foundation of a great society full of people who uphold and debate virtue in all its complexity. But for people to be virtuous, they have to be free. You can't force people to be virtuous. You can't coerce people to do the right thing.
In Much Ado About Corona, Vincent and Stefanie discuss this very theme in part five of the novel:
----
“Freedom is everything,” she replied without hesitation. “Without freedom, there’s really nothing left to sacrifice.”
“It’s not that black and white,” I said. “They haven’t taken all our freedom away. And we never had all our freedom in the first place. We are forced to go to school, to pay taxes, to wear a seatbelt.”
“And maybe,” she said, with an edge of irritation, “if we had stood up to those violations, we wouldn’t be fighting for the right to work, use a public bathroom or smile at our neighbours.”
“Actually,” I said, “I kind of think wearing a seatbelt is a good idea.”
“So do I,” said Stefanie. “But whether I wear a seatbelt or not isn’t hurting anyone but me. I should have the freedom to decide, not them.”
“But without any laws, we’ll have anarchy,” I said.
She rolled her eyes. “Right now, with all these immoral restrictions, we’re barrelling past anarchy straight into chaos. We can’t even rely on the police or the courts anymore. Too many rules ensure anarchy.”
---
The conversation takes place just before the chaos of too many laws kicks down the door at the novel's climax (which most readers didn't see coming).
If you haven't read it yet, I encourage you to exercise your freedom to do so by heading over here and buying yourself a copy at: https://MuchAdoAboutCorona.com
—John C. A. Manley
PS “[Much Ado About Corona] is quite thick and yet I surprised myself at how quickly I got through it," says L.L. Tremblay, author of Seven Roses and Light Over Dark, "I had a hard time putting it down! It is a captivating and relatable story. I loved all the characters, and the writing style. While it is written as a fiction it feels real. I cannot wait for the next one!”
John C. A. Manley is the author of Much Ado About Corona: A Dystopian Love Story, the forthcoming All The Humans Are Sleeping and other works of speculative fiction. Get free samples of his stories by becoming a Blazing Pine Cone email subscriber at: https://blazingpinecone.com/subscribe/
