The authors of the article argue that governments are increasingly using public health policies to justify increased control over the lifestyles of individual citizens. They cite examples such as smoking bans, mandatory vaccination, and proposals to regulate obesity, insisting that adults must retain the right to make independent decisions about their health, even if those choices involve risks.
The Principle of Personal Responsibility
Each such directive is presented as a public health measure, but in essence, it is an instrument of state control. The concept of a 'paternalistic state' does not seek consent—it presupposes it. Classical liberalism is based on the simple assertion: adults own their own bodies.
This ownership includes the right to make erroneous choices: consuming sugar, neglecting physical exercise, smoking, or refusing vaccinations. The state has the right to inform, persuade, and warn, and in limited cases, to demand honest disclosure of information, but it should not prohibit or coerce individual choice. Coercion remains coercion, even if it is masked as a medical approach.
Limitations of State Power
'Paternalistic state' has mastered the art of benevolent overreach, with every directive supported by statistical data. For example, smoking causes lung cancer, and sugar contributes to diabetes—these statements are true. However, fundamentally, the truth of these claims does not grant politicians the authority to control what an adult chooses to put into their body.
If the logic were consistent, the state would also have to ban alcohol, which causes measurable harm. Public health directives fail by their own standards. Smoking bans force businesses to switch to uncontrolled black markets where product quality is unknown; compulsion generates the opposite motivation. Markets and education do not do this.
Alternatives to State Control
The classical liberal approach is not anarchy, but providing people with free will when information is available. Public health campaigns are appropriate if they are voluntary and honest. Warning labels help make choices. Indicating calorie counts on products also informs, but none of this forces people to change their attitudes.
Private intermediaries already compensate for a healthier lifestyle through lower insurance premiums—this is a market solution, not a mandate. Some argue that public health differs in that one person's bad choices cost others through the healthcare system, but this is a common trap of interventionism.
Self-Responsibility and Freedom
If this logic is applied fairly, the state should ban motorcycle riding. The honest answer lies in self-responsibility, supported by voluntary insurance. No one is obligated to join the state healthcare system.
People making risky decisions can pay higher private premiums—this is freedom with responsibility. The World Health Organization promotes 'best buys,' which always include taxes and bans. Global health officials view people as variables to be optimized, not as subjects possessing rights. The 'paternalistic state' is not an invention of South Africa; it is a global ideology that views freedom as a problem to be solved, rather than a principle to be defended.
The Strategy of Classical Liberalism
What would a health strategy look like within classical liberalism? First, it would repeal lifestyle directives: no smoking bans in private establishments and no mandatory vaccinations. Second, it would fund independent, non-political health information that presents benefits and risks without coercion. Third, it would trust adults in their choices.
The counterargument from proponents of the 'paternalistic state' is always condescending: people are insufficiently informed or lack sufficient willpower, so experts must make the decisions. However, this debate collapses under careful analysis; the same experts who ban smoking permit alcohol advertising. Public health directives are never neutral; they reflect the preferences of those who hold power at any given time.
A conservative state bans drugs, and a progressive one bans sugar; neither asks for consent nor respects self-governance. Markets already offer a superior path: private gyms compete on price and quality, and nutrition tracking apps work without coercion. Ethical consumerism allows people to avoid companies selling sugary drinks or tobacco without needing to call the police. These are quiet successes of altruism that are not publicized because no one is subjected to coercion, fines, or arrest, but they work.
Every repealed ban is a small victory for a free society. Freedom is not the absence of risk. Freedom is the right to take one's own risks; a free society consists of people whose decisions you may not like. This includes people who live shorter lives due to their own choices. This is not an accident; it is the essence of individual autonomy. The 'paternalistic state' offers security at the cost of submission, whereas classical liberalism offers dignity.