Jackie Danicki

Thank you to everyone who sent such thoughtful and kind emails to me about the inconsiderate smokers post. Believe it or not, I fret way too much about people reading what I write here and thinking that I’m either neurotic or perpetually grouchy about insignificant things (hey, can’t I be both?). But just when I fear I may have exposed a little too much of my sick little mind, I get a ton of emails that reassure me that I’m not the only one being driven crazy. (I’ve also been told by Miss Amy that she is fixin’ to publish a response tomorrow to my post, so watch this space.)

Last night, I was looking through Antoine’s bookshelves and found a very timely paperback: Smoking and Liberty: Government as a Public Health Problem by Pierre Lemieux. Antoine’s copy is actually signed by Lemieux, who wishes him “bonne chance dans le combat pour la liberté”. The back of it reads:

A little imagination shows the two different worlds that we can leave to our children. In one of these worlds, people fear everything and the shadow of everything, except the state which, for their own good, imprisons them in the “administrative tyranny” that Tocqueville had foreseen. This world is calm and cool, but dull, savorless, smokeless, and odorless. Product packaging has been standardized, and authority has posted warnings and “forbidden” signs everywhere…

The second world stands at the opposite pole, with its colorful diversity, liberty and responsibility. Every individual lives his life as he sees fit, assuming the risks of his joys and the anguish of his death. Instead of devices delivering nicotine, caffeine or ethanol to human resources glued to their social functions, it features individuals who smoke, sip black coffee, and drink Bordeaux.

There is a common denominator between these two worlds: the mortality rate is 100% in both. But the men who live and die are not the same: in the first case, they are slaves; in the second, free individuals.

Now I can see how this could sound alarmist to someone who hasn’t experienced firsthand any sort of administrative tyranny. But then I can’t imagine that many such people exist, so can only imagine that someone who has problems accepting the above has not thought much about the rules and regulations that govern us even while we are sleeping.

I found it interesting that, having mentioned in my first post on this issue that the duty I feel is to myself, my children, and their children, I then picked up Lemieux’s book and saw him addressing the same worry. I am sure that there are those who would choose the world of cotton wool for their children over the world of choices and accountability any day. I am tempted to say that I am just not sure how comfortable I feel sharing this world with them, but the truth is that I am quite sure: I am far from comfortable, and downright disturbed by the havoc they wreak and would further wreak if given the chance.

So the goal is not to give them the chance, while not pretending that the concerns they use to legitimise their drive for administrative tyranny do not exist. As has often been noted, the world in which all individuals’ rights are respected is the most difficult to govern. That does not mean we should not try.

Filed under: Life