Understanding the State | Episode 25 | Everything is Everything

What do we mean when we use the words 'the state'? Why did it evolve? What should its limits be? What have we normalized about it that should terrify us? Are we all part-time slaves?
Welcome to Episode 25 of Everything is Everything, a weekly podcast hosted by Amit Varma and Ajay Shah.
In this episode, Amit and Ajay talk about how the existence of the state is itself an act of violence -- a necessary one, as we need it to protect our rights. But we should consider, whenever we recommend government action, that every act of government is an act of violence. It carries a moral cost, and so we should set its limits accordingly. A useful prism to think of this is the one of scope and strength. Oh, and Ajay walked into a glass wall!
This episode is sponsored by THE PUNE PUBLIC POLICY FESTIVAL, which takes place on January 19 & 20, 2024. The theme this year is TRADEOFFS. Click here for more details, and to register: www.pppf.in/
If you like watching Everything is Everything, please like, please subscribe, please share, please comment! Now! Do it!
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
00:00 Teaser and packaging
00:50 Introduction: Ajay Hits a Glass Wall
02:17 Chapter 1: First-Principles Thinking
09:55 Chapter 2: The State = Violence
25:30 Chapter 3: Scope and Strength
43:25 Our Sponsor's Message
44:53 Chapter 4: Ajay's Recco
46:02 Chapter 5: Amit's Recco
USEFUL RESOURCES:
1. Amit on Twitter: / amitvarma
2. Ajay on Twitter: / ajay_shah
3. The Seen and the Unseen -- Amit's audio podcast: seenunseen.in/
(Also on all podcast apps. And KZbin, though less than 1% of listens come from here: www.youtube.com/@TheSeenAndTh...)
4. Ajay's organisation, XKDR Forum, on KZbin: / @xkdr
5. In Service of the Republic -- Vijay Kelkar and Ajay Shah: amzn.eu/d/hwGILb3
6. The Art of Clear Writing -- Amit's writing course: indiauncut.com/clear-writing/
7. The policy questions around airlines -- Ajay Shah: www.mayin.org/ajayshah/MEDIA/...
8. Fixing the Knowledge Society -- Episode 24 of Everything is Everything: • Fixing the Knowledge S...
9. Every Act of Government Is an Act of Violence -- Amit Varma: indiauncut.com/every-act-of-g...
10. Your maid funds Unani (2007) -- Amit Varma: indiauncut.com/taxes-in-india...
11. Taxes Should Be Used for Governance, Not Politics -- Amit Varma: indiauncut.substack.com/p/6-t...
12. Where Your Taxes Go: Amit's section of wasteful spending on India Uncut: indiauncut.com/category/old-m...
13. Caged Tiger: How Too Much Government Is Holding Indians Back -- Subhashish Bhadra: amzn.eu/d/8ZRoGik
14. Subhashish Bhadra on Our Dysfunctional State -- Episode 333 of The Seen and the Unseen: • Ep 333: Subhashish Bha...
15. State Building -- Francis Fukuyama: amzn.eu/d/2AihRzw
16. Restaurant Regulations in India -- Episode 18 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Madhu Menon): • Ep. 18: Restaurant Reg...
17. Going from strong as in scary to strong as in capable -- Suyash Rai and Ajay Shah: blog.theleapjournal.org/2015/...
18. The Importance of the 1991 Reforms -- Episode 237 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Shruti Rajagopalan and Ajay Shah): • Ep 237: The Importance...
19. Why Freedom Matters -- Episode 10 of Everything is Everything: • Why Freedom Matters | ...
20. Essays on Nationalism -- Rabindranath Tagore: amzn.eu/d/1WcPidC
21. The Libertarian Reader -- Edited by David Boaz: amzn.eu/d/fqVjFKD
22. What is Libertarianism? -- Episode 117 of The Seen and the Unseen (w David Boaz): • Ep. 117: What is Liber...
23. The Origins of Political Order -- Francis Fukuyama: amzn.eu/d/aGyLk8R
24. Political Order and Political Decay -- Francis Fukuyama: amzn.eu/d/clZ96Aa
25. Kashi Ka Assi -- Kashinath Singh: amzn.eu/d/9BrkGVR
Produced by Amit Varma
Shot by Vaishnav Vyas and Nomsita MS Haritashya: / vaishnav.vyas
Edited by Nomsita MS Haritashya: / nomsitaharitashya
Thanks to Gaurav Chintamani for helping with sound: / gaurav_chintamani
Chapter images & additional illustrations by Simahina: / i_am_simahina

[@mohitpuri123]

To whomsoever it may concern, one of the keenest conversations around the theory of knowledge and the state. So excited for the upcoming episodes.

[@anilsaxena7410]

I am a regular listener of Seen and Unseen,which I often listen to during my morning walks.I started viewing Every thing is everything once I came to know about it but for some inexplicable reason could not pursue any episode till the end.Today I was determined to see through its end,and what a pleasurable reward it gave.The subject was interesting, and both u libertarians have made it doubly enjoyable. Now I am going to see all of ur episodes one by one like a tortoise. Keep the good job on.I knew your erudition and acumen quite well but Ajay Shah seems to have even more potential to entertain and inform simultaneously. Thanks a lot.

[@tariqmusthafa8186]

On "we exist for the sake of the state" - there was this really funny ad in The Hindu that made me chuckle. It said something along the lines of "work hard to make our Prime Minister's dream of a $5T economy come true". Will try digging it up and posting here.

[@amartyaanand4945]

That is really funny,do share it.

[@rushabhsagara8766]

Before I say anything, just wants to thank Amit and Ajay for this show. This has become my favorite thing on KZbin! It has made my fridays special, the day that I wait for in each week! And on the point of the framework of seeing Indian Constitution as protecting the State from the people rather than the other way around, I feel it is the way it is because of, as Amit rightly pointed out, the context that India was in! The kind of special treatment that Indian State received at the time of Independence, and continues to receive today, has also got something to do with the societal framework of India. In a country deeply embedded in caste and where instead of the violence of state, the "violence of society" was something which ruled each and every pore of our existence, I think, the state in India was visioned as a kind of a Superman who will save the downtrodden from this violence. Hence, theoretically, in India, I believe, we traded the violence of the society with the violence of the State. Ans also, it isn't plainly as if the Constitution just protects the State from the people, there are the Fundamental rights explicitly protecting the individuals from the State. We also got ourselves a Judiciary which came up with the "Basic Structure Doctrine" that again gave some semblance of protection from the State. And these things, I think, also answers Ajay's question on the 'budget constraint' on State coercion, which I agree that there's no detailed statement organising and limiting it to a proper extent, but the fundamental rights and the Judiciary, at least to some extent does play a role of that constraint that Ajay was talking of! Other than that, I would love to know what you think on this. And eagerly waiting for the next episodes.

[@amitvarma]

Thanks. The fundamental rights aren't strong enough -- the exceptions to the right to free speech in Article 19 (2) shift the balance towards the state again, for example. An old piece on this: indiauncut.com/dont-insult-pasta/ Our illiberal first Amendment was such a disaster for free speech. Here's an old episode on this: kzbin.info/www/bejne/n5-lZZ-Lmbmdoa8 The Right to Property was diluted so much. Again, an old episode on this: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jIrZi2iCq62UgJo And so on...

[@ajayshah5705]

The idea of a budget constraint is that government spending has to add up to 100. When someone proposes more spending in one dimension, they have to cut back spending in another dimension. There is no such budget constraint in state coercion. You can coerce the people on surrogacy and telecom and cloud computing and foreign contributions and ... There is no limit, there is no check and balance, the coercion has just piled on over the years.

[@rushabhsagara8766]

@@ajayshah5705 ! First of all, thanks for replying and honestly, a big THANKYOU for the amount & kind of knowledge you and Amit are freely passing around. Glad to have the both you! Now, in reply of your comment, I would say that State going into almost each domain like surrogacy and telecom and etc etc. is there due to some reasons that I have thought of, but to get it you just have to hear my chain of thoughts... So I feel that a State, as the highest form of Society, tries to maintain a semblance of Order as against anarchy. And it protects our rights in the process. And since, there is a possibility that an anarchy can be there in any of the above-mentioned sectors (telecom, surrogacy, etc), I feel it demands state interference. So, what if, what you call coercion is what some may call regulation? Ultimately, an act of regulation is also an act of coercion itself. But in a State, I feel, we allow regulation to some extent, be it in any sector, just as a check on anarchy and protecting rights. Of course, once it crosses a limit, then regulation turns into coercion. I would like to know what you think on it. And again, thanks for taking out the time.

[@shahzorkhan123]

Loved the quote - Discover not design.

[@Ramesh.7GP]

Thank you

[@whoisthis7820]

Anarchy, State and Utopia does not argue we get rid of the State. Nozick specifically claims that anarchy would not work. An example of a book that argues for getting rid of the State is Problem of Political Authority. Another good book is The Machinery of Freedom

[@hrishikeshnath7193]

Conception of Strong, indeed! To see waves not as waves but as water, watch "Everything is everything"

[@sathyendrababu7868]

Stupendous🎉❤ Less scope and that too decentralized to the extent possible and a strong state that sticks to the Constitution and takes measured changes after debate deliberations & hearing out descent❤

[@makvideoz6]

Great episode Amit and Ajay! Whenever there is a discussion that touches on the purpose of state and thinking in first principles, can’t help but think of Thomas Hobbes and his ideas. Wondering if you will do a take on Hobbes and the politician philosophy of his era that lead to the ideas of modern state. Hobbes was probably the earliest enlightenment thinkers to actually think about the state (he used the term sovereign instead) in first principles. He was essentially asking the question where does the need for a state come from and how does it derive its authority. His thought experiments about early pre-government societies that he called “the state of nature” and how in a state of nature and in the absence of laws and rights it would have been a “war of all against all” resulting in a life that was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short”. He the proposes that to escape the brutish state of nature, individuals collectively agree to a “social contract”, sacrificing some of their freedoms to achieve security and order through a sovereign authority. Hobbes was probably wrong in many of his concrete proposals but his biggest contribution was kicking of this first principles thinking about state and its legitimacy during the enlightenment period. Many subsequent thinkers including John Locke (who was a huge influence on the US founding fathers) continued on his thought experiments but modifying many of its assumptions and ideas along the way. So while the state has a monopoly on violence where does it derive that authority from is a fascinating question. On a different note on the origins of state this is an absolutely fascinating conversation between Econtalks’s Russ Robert’s and Omer Moav on the emergence of the state kzbin.info/www/bejne/pHqQY6NmhNukb9Usi=lVLa1_sfdWkY3A_m

[@amitvarma]

Thanks for the thoughts, and for the link. Russ is a legend!

[@abhiastheysay]

Hi Amit and Ajay, Always enjoy the conversation and I am grateful for such a fantastic repository that you guys have created for the next generation and many more to come. Just a random thought and may be there is an episode hidden in it. "What are those three crucial points in history which has changed the world the most and made it what we see today"? Or do you guys think like water history too ultimately flows in a natural path and consolidates to reach a specific point irrespective of the wars, natural disasters and influential people?

[@aruns9]

For me personally, I don't enjoy the "teaser". I always end up skipping it so that I can listen to that portion with full context

[@amitvarma]

Thanks, noted. Anybody else feel that way?

[@pvijay55]

Me too!

[@punterash]

me too

[@HemantKumar-ot3er]

@@amitvarma Yes. Skip it. It's not adding anything.

[@gokulnair5618]

Same!

[@_Anjali_omprakash]

I wish I had both of u as my professor

[@ajayshah5705]

28 episodes now available! More than what you got from most of your professors! And Amit growls, he will be the marathon runner and get to 104 episodes. He is the svelte Bengali athletic type.

[@akhilesh5027]

Ajay said "you gentle reader, get off your butt and start reading some books." Whereas this activity is best done very much on one's butt.

[@amitvarma]

This is a good point.

[@ajayshah5705]

Every time I get the urge to exercise, I sit down and read a book.

[@rounakdatta3225]

Lol, reminder to stroll and read at times.

[@pushkarratnaparkhi2205]

Best podcast on KZbin.💯

[@hrishikeshnath7193]

In 3023, this time capsule will have served its purpose and whole population will fight for this---the real Infinity Stone with an alternate purpose

[@sh0001]

Mailbag question: I was wondering if State coercion of one form (e.g., taxes) bolsters State coercion of other forms? If there is no correlation between the two forms of coercion what lessons can be drawn from understanding the constraints on one form of coercion that would help us mitigate the excesses committed by the state elsewhere?

[@ajayshah5705]

There is a mild connection. Tax money is used to create CBI and then CBI is used to do coercion. But the magnitudes of tax money required to coerce are tiny. The bulk of tax money is spent on running large bureaucracies and on welfare programs.

[@saikatlahiri1435]

Another excellent episode. Random thoughts, pardon the verbosity. 1. Please consider better visual aids and keeping them on screen longer (since this is an audio-VISUAL show). The quad chart and the country mapping from Fukuyama may have been done better and used to talk about the ideal state (colour coding and animation). I love that you did it to start with. 2. On the strong state pushing legislation, Ajay's example of the ME lawmaker plays while our "Parliament" passes laws at lightning speed to enthusiastic cheer from the middle and affluent classes (lacking real liberal education to your point again). 3. Forget 7% and the US, how about chugging away at 5.5% p.a. for 3 decades and getting within spitting distance of South Korea today in PPP terms. That would be super, and more realistic. But without a liberal society and state, we are more likely to end up in a Brazil like state. 4. Tagore's essays on nationalism changed the way I thought about the world when I read it around age 20 many decades ago. 5. Looking at Ajay's lovely shirt, I remembered I dont own a red shirt either (earlier episode I know).

[@amitvarma]

Thanks for the feedback. We have limited resources -- the show is a labour of love -- so things like animations etc are just not possible. 🙂

[@ajayshah5705]

Liberal, n.: A person who won't wear a red shirt.

[@AmitAgrahari-eg7sv]

A lot of infrastructure is monopoly business, and it is always better that monopoly business is in the state's hands rather than private entities.

[@ajayshah5705]

There are many reasons that run against this. The private sector does better o&m. Government assets rapidly fall apart. The private sector makes better decisions on what to build. Government assets come up through political considerations. The private sector has no limits on resources and management. The government is highly limited on both. On this, see kzbin.info/www/bejne/gpPKmnefZ9tnotUsi=xgCl-qv7I_HFaqmp The private sector builds in a cost efficient way. The bang for the buck is inferior in the government. There are many, many difficulties in making private infrastructure work! But the above elements of superiority are the prize that keeps us going.

[@shubhoroy3921]

Both parts of your statements may not be correct. Most infrastructure sectors are not monopolies, they seem like they are because the government makes them into monopolies. Railways and roadways are substitutable, and so are wired and wireless internet. Usually, laws made by the government put up high entry barriers, leading to one player in the infrastructure sector. For long, we thought ports would be monopolies. However, we can build multiple ports, each run by a private player. It is not true that it is always better if a monopoly business is in the hands of the state. Electricity supply may be considered a monopoly (in a small area). However, electricity supply was poor when it was in the hands of the state. Monopolies are not bad in the private sector as long as there are no legal barriers to entry into the business. Government ownership brings its own set of problems, like the lack of financial discipline. In most cases, the abuse (if any) of private monopolies is less harmful to society, than the state's hands.

[@purvisurya5271]

Since the overarching theme of this video can be trade-off. The one i face every Friday is : the more friends i share this video with, the less friends i will be left to whom i can pass your insights as my own and appear smart.

[@ajayshah5705]

On the other hand, you become part of a secret society that shares the paradigm and terminology!

[@twenty-twenty]

Missed opportunity to name this - "the state of the State"

[@amitvarma]

I literally typed that in while designing the thumbnail and then realised it was only clever and not true, as we're not discussing the state of the state but the rationale for it and the limits we should set.

[@twenty-twenty]

@@amitvarma I’ll allow it.

[@akhilesh5027]

You could have done a series.. the mandate of the state.. the gate of the state.. the state of the state.. the fate of the state..@amitvarma

[@AjayBabu_S]

On a lighter note, there's a standard Mexican tint to this episode..does it have anything to do with Mexican state

[@ajayshah5705]

Didn't understand, "standard Mexican tint"?

[@remojoseph1985]

I don't want to be that guy who says I'm the first to comment. That would be beneath me so I'm not saying it.

[@Dokja0]

Don't say it remo.

[@twenty-twenty]

Millions appreciate your restraint. Clearly not a state actor

[@amitvarma]

Haha, you guys are a hoot!

[@tariqmusthafa8186]

It's still unclear to me why we shouldn't aspire to achieve sustained and high economic growth over 30 years. Its unlikely we'll be able to pull it off, and yes we should not use state violence to achieve these ends, but surely we should aim to get as many Indians out of poverty as soon as possible. Clearly I'm missing something here.

[@ajayshah5705]

You're welcome to aspire. The thing is, it's nearly impossible. The danger is, the attempt at the sprint sets the stage for harmful things that disable the tortoise.

[@supreethvasisht2451]

I don't agree to the fact State should be deliberately slow, this already is the case in India. Good decisions are not in the best intrest of elites so they stonewall it, be it farm laws or labour laws and in the name of being methodical and acoomadative, not act in the larger interest.

[@ajayshah5705]

Farm laws, labour laws, in the interests of the elite?

[@supreethvasisht2451]

Yes, I consider Punjabi Farmers with 200 Acres, who can afford Lamborghini for their spoilt kids, not paying a single penny in Taxes as elite, since farm laws will make lives of other fellow farmers better, bring their goods in open market instead of elite Mandis. Labour laws similarly benefit manufacturing capitalists, yet the political elites and commies will stonewall it, since they will loose grip on the impoverished masses, who use platitudes for their benefit@@ajayshah5705

[@anirudhacharya4844]

@amitvarma Sorry for making an off-topic comment but this seemed like the best way to reach you. Can you please do an episode on The Seen And The Unseen podcast with Raghuram Rajan, one of those deep-dive marathon episodes? I remember Caravan Magazine had done a long-form article on him maybe 10 years ago, but a lot has happened since then.

[@tarangrathi4956]

Pune mentioned 🔥🔥 what the fuck is a helmet? 🔥🔥🔥🔥

[@ashooshukla]

An instrument of state violence - said a Punekar

[@nagegowdaks7650]

I just want know why you people are addressing viewers as readers