In political debates, collectivists always cite roads as an example of things that the government should provide. Before education and even water and sewer services, roads are always cited as a service that, somehow, must be a government function. But are they really?

The most fundamental road is one between you and me. You live there and I live here. We decide that we need to exchange goods or services or we just want to socialize so we construct a road between our houses. First, that would require that we purchase the land and then build the road on it and we are happy that we’ve been able to do it. Or maybe we’re not too happy about it.

In the latter case, we’re each going to be a little more careful in our assessments of our need for such a road in the future. In the former case, it works out well and each of us is the better for it.

Now comes another guy who lives nearby and decides that he’d like to use our road. We can either allow him to or we can refuse him. In the former case we may decide to charge him a fee to use our road, or we can allow him to buy into our partnership. If we first refuse him for whatever reason, he may try to offer us some money to allow him and then that branch of the decision tree continues. Eventually, he may offer us so much money that it becomes attractive enough for us to allow him to use our road even though we can’t stand him and don’t trust him. We may thus place some conditions on his use of the road. If we continue to refuse him, he may just give up and then build his own road. And it goes on from there as others decide that they could benefit from using our road.

Later, if we have enough members of our group, we may build other roads or try to hook up in a cooperative where we extend to others the rights to use their roads and give them the rights to use ours. We can place restrictions on their use, similar to suspending the license of an unsafe driver, etc.

One of the things about government roads is that they are so arbitrary. They are laid out in what government officials think is the most reasonable and organized manner. In fact, they are anything but. As in every other matter, the most efficient way to determine the best use of a piece of land is through the free market. Determining the best use through government fiat is tyranny. If the economic need for a piece of land is great enough, it will become apparent in the price that someone is willing to pay for it. If someone is unwilling to surrender his land, no matter what, then the necessity is not great enough.

What happens when the government decides to build a road through an already settled area? They simply condemn the land and take it by force. This is once again tyranny. Although constitutional, it is nevertheless tyranny. I know people that this has happened to.

During the rush to build the Interstate Highway System, thousands of homes and buildings were seized, across the country, and destroyed to build this monument to inefficiency. It was spurred by the dual pressures of Pres. Dwight D. Eisenhower, inspired by his experiences during World War I, and the trucking lobby. It has nearly destroyed the railroad industry. By slashing through thriving urban neighborhoods, separating sections from each other, it has reduced many to ghosts of their former selves. Families were displaced from homes they had occupied for decades and some for generations. Kelo vs. Connecticut is no new phenomenon.

After the experiences began to register, there were concerted neighborhood associations that began organized resistance to this onslaught. Interstate 95, North goes in a fairly straight line from Providence, Rhode Island toward Boston but ends at Rte. 128. Suddenly, you must take a ramp to 128 North. The road continues for a very few yards but there is a dead end where what obviously had been planned to continue straight ahead into and through the heart of Boston. Rte. 128 North is now designated as I-95.

What happened was that people got angry and resisted the plans to disrupt their neighborhoods. I suspect that this has happened across the country. The original Interstate system as planned, will most likely never be completed. Finally, we have a small but significant triumph of the people over the inertia of plodding government.

As William F. Buckley once observed, some of the Interstate routes go essentially nowhere. Like everything else government does it has been brutal in accomplishing this and for what? The disruption of communities and families across the country? But also, lining the pockets of the preferred contractors who built them? How many ‘favors’, political or even financial, exchanged hands in the process?

But what about the injustices that have already been inflicted on the prior victims? As George Washington observed, “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.” There was an awful lot of misery inflicted in the name of just the Interstate system alone. What about all those other roads across this country, the old federal system and state and county roads, etc.?

I will leave it to others far more knowledgeable than I to answer all of these questions. But, just like everything else the government gets its grimy hands into, roads become a wedge for more government power, and as always, to the detriment of liberty.

There are speed traps, drivers’ licenses and sundry other regulations and restrictions. Of course, they are often touted as safety concerns but in reality they aren’t.

I was once pulled over at night in New Hampshire by a state trooper. The offense? One of my tail lights was out. That was fine but if the true concern was safety, then why did the cop take out his flashlight and start shining it into the cargo compartment of my old Volkswagen Beetle into the paper bags and luggage?

Not all cops will do that but many will. Many will seize any opportunity to inflict humiliation on those they regard as their underlings. Feel violated? Fast forward to the proposals that Homeland Security has for roads, busses and trains.

Speed traps are another issue. In a recent study Jacksonville, Florida was listed as number 5 on a list of worst city for speed traps. And there are many here.

They are almost invariably where people tend to speed which should tell you that the speed limits in those places are too low. But, since they serve as a source of income that are not taxes and thus can’t be used as issues in campaigns against incumbents, there is no downside in enforcing them. Residents are easily stampeded into supporting them and it’s nearly impossible for reason to prevail.

Then there is the matter of seat belts. I’ve used them since 1959 when I insisted that my father complete the partial installation of them in a used 1955 Dodge that had we bought. My father sat on his whenever he drove but right from the age of 14, I’ve used them. I believe that anyone who doesn’t use them should be given a Darwin Award.

That said, I think it is a massive and typical invasion of our individual rights to require their use. Think about it. Government confiscates our money to build the roads, then requires us to pay to use them further and then fines us for not using them properly.

What is especially galling about traffic rules and regulations is when an unreasonable one is finally changed. Are we to infer that what was dangerous yesterday isn’t today? And what about all of the revenue that was collected from the unsuspecting victim? Is that returned? Or the difference in insurance rates? There is collusion between some insurance companies and government.

And what is the justification for all of this? Why government roads? And what I have covered just scratches, the surface of the injustices and intrusions engendered by government roads.

The take home message is that anything the government does becomes a wedge for it to insinuate itself into more and more of our daily business. It’s time to articulate and publicize the libertarian argument against this most basic of government functions. As Murray Rothbard observed, there isn’t a single thing private industry can’t do better than government.

March 26, 2011

<span style=”color: #800000;”><strong>~ About the Author ~</strong></span>
<a rel=”attachment wp-att-5734″ href=”http://www.federalobserver.com/?attachment_id=5734″><img title=”meekins_thumb” src=”http://www.federalobserver.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/meekins_thumb.jpg” alt=”meekins_thumb” width=”90″ height=”120″ /></a>Frederick Meekins is an Internet columnist. He holds a BS from the University of Maryland in Political Science/History and a MA in Apologetics &amp; Christian Philosophy from Trinity Theological Seminary. In the future, Frederick plans to continue publishing his commentaries and hopefully compile them into a self-published book. Frederick’s research interests include Worldview Applicaiton, Christian Apologetics, The Implications of Aberrant Theologies &amp; Ideologies, Futurology, Eschatology, Science Fiction, Terrorism Studies, Environmentalism, Education Policy, Political Theory, and America’s Judeo-Christian Foundations. Frederick is also an ordained Non-Denominational Minister. His website providing links to news around the Internet is The American WorldView Dispatch at <a href=”http://americanworldview.tripod.com” target=”_blank”><span style=”color: blue;”><strong><span style=”text-decoration: underline;”>http://americanworldview.tripod.com</span></strong></span></a>.  Media inquiries can be directed to:<a href=”mailto:americanworldview@hotmail.com” target=”_blank”><span style=”color: blue;”><strong><span style=”text-decoration: underline;”> americanworldview@hotmail.com</span></strong></span></a>