|
Perhaps when he refers to "monopolies" in government, he's
outing himself as a panarchist—an opponent not of government
per se but of the monopoly state?
But no: The "monopoly" Liu objects to is not the state's
monopoly on violence, but the Communist Party's monopoly on
the state.
The "crime" with which he was charged revolved around his
support for Charter 08, a reformist document demanding the
transformation of China into a modern "liberal" welfare
state, complete with competition between parties for the
"right" to exploit China's workers and peasants; "freedom"
for the press to choose the tunes it sings in its guilded
cage; theft-funded "social security;" and "civic education"
to make sure young whippersnappers don't get caught up with
any silly ideas like, well, real freedom.
Liu doesn't seek peace, he just seeks a kinder, gentler
version of the political class's war on the productive
class. That opinion shouldn't bring about its holder's
imprisonment, but it doesn't merit a prize for support of
peace, either.
Last year, the Nobel committee awarded the "Peace Prize" to
the world's most vociferous warmonger (among warmongers with
the power to fulfill their fantasies, at any rate). Its
failure of discretion this year isn't nearly as glaring, but
the committee continues to miss the point: The state is the
ultimate weapon in Hobbes's "war of all against all," and so
long as it remains loaded it shall be continuously fired by
those whose fingers have access to the trigger.
You can have the state or you can have peace, but you can't
have both.
|
If only it were so! I like to think I'm relatively knowledgeable on
the subject of inciting subversion of state power. Hell, that's pretty much my
job description. And I'd be the first to congratulate the Nobel committee had it
chosen an actual subversive for the prize. But let's see what Liu himself has to
say:
