Many conservatives and libertarians say reducing the size of government is a top priority, but they pay little attention to the factors that drive government growth in the first place. For most small government advocates, organizational neutrality and minimal state power are measures of success. However, they tend to overlook how these factors make state expansion inevitable.
Libertarians have a variety of views, but many believe that national borders are artificially imposed by states and that individuals should be able to move freely at will. This belief that governments should not give preferential treatment to certain cultures or people leads to multiculturalism. Ironically, it also creates the need for large-scale state apparatuses to mediate conflicts between diverse cultures.
In a multicultural society without a unified tradition, all laws seem like artificial impositions.
When America's founders gained independence from Great Britain, they did not seek to abolish all government or give individuals unfettered freedom. They recognized the need for government, but believed that government could be limited if people shared moral principles and maintained individual virtue.
Early America included state churches, blasphemy laws, and strict standards for public conduct. In their view, freedom was not the absence of authority, but governance in line with people's common values and beliefs.
Those who established the United States government recognized that it only worked for moral and religious people. they revealed the fact. They believed that if people behaved well and pursued the common good without state coercion, they would be less able to be effectively ruled by government.
Everyone who seeks goodness does so by following what is considered natural within their culture or religion. Laws and restrictions that align with these beliefs do not seem burdensome. Common expectations are often enough to maintain order. In this sense, freedom and a shared moral vision are inseparable.
If the social forces of religion and culture remain strong, the state can maintain order with minimal interference. Strong families and communities with common moral foundations mediate conflicts and stop antisocial behavior before it requires government involvement. However, when these social forces weaken or collapse, the state must intervene to prevent disorder.
This dynamic explains why governments that do not support a particular culture and its virtues inevitably grow in size and power.
Multiculturalism, by its very nature, destroys shared moral visions. Culture shapes us from birth and helps us understand the world and our place in it. Culture and religion define right and wrong, establish social customs that we consider natural, and provide a sense of the good life for both individuals and communities. Although different cultures may overlap in some regions, this minimal shared morality alone is insufficient to foster harmony, as multicultural societies by definition embody multiple and competing visions of the good and how to pursue it. There is often not enough to do.
If people share the culture and moral vision of a strong majority, governments can remain small. States simply had to make laws to suit their culture, so those laws didn't feel like an imposition. Critics may label a government that supports and protects the majority culture as “illiberal,” but it may still be more likely to allow its citizens to live according to their conscience. However, if a nation becomes multicultural and the nation chooses to support that change, the nation must fundamentally change its role.
In a multicultural society, organic conflict resolution methods and community expectations alone cannot reliably maintain order. Individuals have different views about public conduct, the values taught in public institutions, and what conceptions of the good should guide collective action. These disagreements are fundamental because they arise from the core assumptions of each competing culture. Without a common tradition, there is no organic community structure to mediate such conflicts, and the state must intervene.
In a multicultural nation, the government must act as a neutral arbiter between communities with different moral visions. However, no organization can be truly neutral because moral neutrality does not exist. As a result, public schools, hospitals, libraries, and the military become cultural battlegrounds. Every clash of cultures provides an opportunity for the state to extend its power and impose its ideology on divided and fragmented communities. When people cannot agree to or resolve disputes on their own, governments step in to assume responsibility and gain additional powers.
Arbitrary laws, whether enacted by a tyrant, a technocracy, or a democracy, are still oppressive. In a multicultural society without a unified tradition, all laws appear to be artificial impositions by a nation divorced from a single culture. Although it may run counter to modern small government theory, vigorous government action that protects a unified culture is often more likely to protect freedom than open borders or neutral institutions.
Only a common moral vision rooted in our nation's historic Christian faith can stop the spread of tyranny and preserve the freedoms envisioned by our ancestors. “Unless the Lord builds the house, the builder's labor is in vain.” the psalmist reminds us. “Unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchmen will be watching in vain.”
