Each citizen would then be completely independent of his fellow men, and absolutely dependent upon the state . . . for it is only by the force of the state that the liberty of its members can be secured.I normally dip into the Brussels Journal with mixed feelings; their trenchant Islamophobia is not a taste I wholly share. But there's a half decent piece by Millar on there that is worth reading;
The notion of “legislating for tolerance” echoes Rousseau’s statement in The Social Contract that people “will be forced to be free.” People obviously cannot be forced to be free, because of course in forcing them their freedom is lost. Open-mindedness tends, then, to be the next casualty. D’Entreves has said, quite correctly, that with Rousseau is the notion that “freedom lies in obedience,” and that, as such, from Rousseau we drift “towards the doctrine of totalitarianism.” Totalitarian states, he also says, claim that they allow people to live the good life because, according to them, they embody what is morally right. As such, “man will cease to obey out of fear, but obey out of conscience […]” (A.P. d’Entreves, Natural Law, p. 142). This very belief seems to lie beneath the legislating of the Labour government.