Ethics and morals are not the same.  Ethics are universal.  Morals are not.  However, all morals must adhere to ethics.  Some assume others are wrong.  Meaning, they don’t think individuals aren’t valuing the way others think they should.  Thus, the statists claim, decision making needs to be outsourced.  Outsourced to those that are more moral, like themselves.  Once an encroachment is allowed on individual valuations, there is no logical stopping point.

An individual isn’t moral but can vote morally, very peculiar.  Who are these choices being outsourced to?  These choices are being outsourced to another human.  Are these humans different?  They are not different from any other humans.  They have values just like the rest of us.  Morals are moral in the eye of the actor.  This doesn’t mean every action will be moral or accepted by others.  After all, all humans will make mistakes.

As stated above, there is no logical stopping point once choices are outsourced.  Any state can become a totalitarian state with this flawed logic.  This is to believe Friday has a right to tell Crusoe what he values.  Would Crusoe outsource his decisions to Friday?  I seriously doubt it.  What if Friday tells Crusoe he must outsource his decision to him because he’s moral?    While these are two different scenarios in a thought experiment, the logic is the same.  Namely, choices need to be outsourced to those more moral, with by vote or decree.

In both scenarios above, Friday is the dictator.  Yes, even if Crusoe selected him.  Friday’s role is to enforce morality.  Can anyone enforce morality?  In other words, can you force freedom on others?  This is a violation of ethics.  Property is being violated, and protection of the property is paramount in ethics.  Morals must adhere to ethics.  So, it is immoral to outsource choices, even if it’s believed to be more moral.  This is a contradiction. 

Assume there isn’t a contradiction, for the sake of argument.  How will these morals be enforced?  Even if Crusoe agreed to outsource his decision to Friday, they will disagree eventually.  Crusoe and Friday will have different ideas on what must be done to survive.  Friday must resort to violence to get Crusoe to comply.  However, this is contradictory too. Crusoe values survival.  Friday values power.  Their values must clash. 

Reference

Murray Rothbard; Power & Market