You have probably heard the popular fable in our circles: if you want to defeat the Leviathan, go to the forests, have ten children, homeschool them using sacred books to bypass state schools, and you will have your freedom. Many libertarians, especially those of a conservative bent, view religion, and Christianity in particular, with great sympathy. At first glance, the logic here seems ironclad. Historically, the Church has built magnificent parallel institutions. It is capable of snatching children from the gripping clutches of the state education system, where they are hammered with etatism and the belief that “taxes are the price of civilization” from the cradle. To some, this may seem like the ideal shield against totalitarianism.
But even the sun has spots, and in closed communities, these spots sometimes turn into actual black holes. We are talking about violence against children, elegantly masked as “divine plan.”
A large-scale psychological study was recently conducted, and the figures were quite gruesome. It turns out that if a child is beaten for no reason (which is disgusting in itself), that is one thing. But if they are beaten with a belt while being told, “You are a sinner, God will punish you,” or forced to stay silent about the abuse for the “honor of the community,” the trauma is multiplied a hundredfold. Guilt simply burns out the psyche from the inside.
And this is where the hope of a considerable number of libertarians crashes down. Many of us fantasize that proud freethinkers will emerge from closed traditional communities—little John Galts who will give the stationary bandit the middle finger. But in reality, this produces broken, beaten people with skyrocketing levels of anxiety and depression. A child who was “broken” from childhood in the name of higher powers will not go out to shake the state, because they simply do not have the strength for it. They will grow up as a person accustomed to obeying an authority that hits them on the head with a boot or a sacred book. They will find themselves a new master, and the state loves such people.
Now to the main point—the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP). Violence against a child is a direct and gross violation of the NAP. Children are not the property of parents, like a chair or a crypto wallet. They have rights. And if a father sets up a branch of the Inquisition at home because a child prayed incorrectly or asked an inconvenient question, this is not “freedom of religion,” but banal, blatant aggression.
At this point, many true anarchists might cringe, but libertarians need to monitor as closely as possible what happens behind the high fences of “parallel institutions.” If we see overt physical or cruel psychological violence against children, there is absolutely nothing shameful about unleashing child protective services on such parents.
Yes, some may strongly dislike the idea of calling the state for help. But let’s stay in reality. We do not yet have private detective agencies for the protection of children’s rights that offer them shelter and a proper foster family, and provide aggressors with a dose of a drug to strengthen their violence inhibitor. Saving a victim from an NAP violation in the moment is more important than theoretical purity. If a domestic tyrant is ruining the life of a defenseless person, using the existing protection mechanism (even if it is state-run) is normal and morally justified. This is the protection of the basic right to life and inviolability. You do not become an etatist by saving a child from beatings. You become a human being.
Decentralization and freedom from the state are wonderful. But tyrants must not be allowed to hide behind the Bible or anything else, turning their families into sovereign totalitarian sects. True freedom begins not with our refusal to pay taxes, but with the recognition of every person’s right—even the smallest—to a life without violence.
