The State Is Simply the Specialized Political Organ of Society

And thus it is a terrible confusion to imagine that accepting the existence of the state necessitates a moral double standard. (Someone like Machiavelli posited one, sure, but it isn't necessary to do so!)

Anarchists sometimes say things like, "The state's agents are allowed to collect taxes, while you would be arrested for doing the same: therefore,, there must be two different moralities at work."

Well, so what? Pilots are allowed to fly commercial airliners while I am not. Professional baseball players are allowed to play at Yankee Stadium but not me. My doctor operates on me but not I on him. The priest hears my sins but I do not hear his. When I was a child, my father could send me to my room, but the stranger across the street could not do so. These are roles in the social division of labor.

If the law says, "Joe Smith may collect taxes for himself, but Gene Callahan may not," there would be something fishy going on. But that is not what happens at all: any person appointed as an official tax collector may collect taxes, any person with the right qualifications may at some time be so appointed, and anyone who ceases to be so appointed ceases to be able to collect taxes.

Now, it may or may not be a good idea that our society has decided, for instance, to make policing a job that, in general, only certain authorized people may do. Perhaps we would be better off without a specialized police force. But so long as it is their being authorized to act in a certain role that gives the police the right to act in a way that non-police are forbidden to do, there is not any moral double standard involved, anymore than there is in the fact that if I die intestate my wife gets my money, rather than it being divided equally among all citizens. She gets it not because of some moral double standard that works in her favor, but because of the social role she has.