What I want to discuss with you now may sound like complete nonsense, but I find the topic genuinely interesting. Let’s think it through together.
We know that many religions teach that we are merely guests in this world, born to impose limitations on ourselves in pursuit of a worthy afterlife. Religion was the first social formation in human history to introduce behavioral norms and rules. Then came the Leviathan – the state. Its role gradually expanded until it eventually surpassed that of religion. The state began to establish and enforce its own rules, norms, and social boundaries.
I’ve noticed that in countries where the state is strong, people show less inclination toward personal ownership. They prefer to work for the state, create assets for it, and live off its returns rather than seeking to own those assets themselves – because they don’t want the responsibility that comes with ownership. And when retirement or a decent pension comes, they simply pass the asset on to someone else. This led me to think that there’s a kind of analogy between religion and a strong state.
Now I’m thinking about a third possibility. Let’s imagine a society not dominated by a strong state, but by strong individuals. What happens in that case? Does the individual also impose restrictions on themselves? I can’t quite work out this third analogy. In the first case, religion says: follow the norms, and you’ll be rewarded in the afterlife. The state says: follow the rules, and you’ll enjoy a good life after retirement. But what does the individual say to themselves in a society of strong individuals?