"So long as governments set the example of killing their enemies, private individuals will occasionally kill theirs"

Elbert Hubbard expresses a profound observation on the reciprocal nature of behavior between authorities and the populace. When governments legitimize violence by executing or killing their opponents—whether through war, capital punishment, or political repression—they inadvertently endorse the idea that killing is an acceptable solution to conflict. Authority sets a precedent, shaping cultural norms and moral boundaries, and individuals often look to those in power for cues about right and wrong. If the state habitually justifies lethal force against adversaries, the line between wrongdoing and justified violence blurs. People internalize these actions, whether consciously or subconsciously, and feel emboldened or justified to resolve their own grievances through similar means.

Violence by the state becomes a form of social instruction, trickling down through society as an implicit validation of retributive justice. Governments, with their immense moral and practical influence, establish what is permissible within the collective conscience. When the ultimate taboo—killing—is modeled by those entrusted with upholding justice and order, it undermines the very laws against murder that keep civil society intact. The message sent is inconsistent: murder is wrong for individuals, but permissible for authorities under sanctioned circumstances. Such contradictions breed cynicism and confusion among citizens, fracturing trust in both morality and governance.

The cyclical relationship between public policy and personal conduct emerges; state-endorsed violence perpetuates private acts of violence. Societal norms are not set solely by statutes, but by how laws are enacted and enforced. Simply put, the moral compass of a nation is set by the example of its leaders. When led by empathy and restraint, the populace is likely to emulate those values. But when violence is institutionalized, its legitimacy seeps into societal interactions, triggering sporadic but inevitable acts of personal retribution. Hubbard's reflection calls for self-examination within governance, urging a rethinking of state conduct for the sake of societal harmony and progress.