Belgium’s political and constitutional crisis shows no sign of abating, over a hundred days since the election, with no government having been formed. A lot of bloggers out there have written posts in recent times along the lines of, “Hey, if Belgium can do without a government for a hundred days, why can’t we?” Sadly, it’s not that simple.

If you don’t visit any of the blogs that have done a Belgium bit, congratulations on making ours your blog of choice. Oh, and you probably don’t have a clue what happened. Cutting a long story short, thanks to Belgium’s federal system, under which parties each pander to only one of Belgium’s three linguistic groups, the election held in June returned a combination that has made it almost impossible to form a coalition government.

Fast forward to now. In the past hundred days… nothing has happened. No government has been formed, and very little progress has even been made towards that end. Formal steps have been taken, but few people think a government will be formed soon. Many, instead, are predicting the break-up of Belgium into independent Flemish (productive, liberal, Dutch-speakers in the north) and Walloon (lazy, socialist, French-speakers in the south) states.

Why is this a good thing? Well, so say most classically liberally-inclined bloggers, its proves we don’t need a government. I don’t think I’ve ever read the words ‘the trains are still running’ as many times in my life as I have recently. Others harbour hopes that Belgium will break up: because they want to give the EU a bloody nose, because they sympathise with the Flemings being heavily taxed to subsidise backwards Wallonia, because they believe smaller countries are better for spontaneous order, or a variant on the above.

These are, for the most part, fallacies. Strictly, Belgium does not have a government - but it undeniably does have a state. The absence of Gordon Brown from Downing Street doesn’t mean the government’s schools shut down or its policemen decide to take a day (or, in Belgium’s case, a hundred days) off. Other people, civil servants, will continue to do their jobs. Either we’re ruled by politicians, or we’re ruled by bureaucrats: it’s lose-lose.

Furthermore, the legislative drivel has not be ended. Belgium, at the heart of the European Union, would be able to rely on the EU to further advance the intrusion by the state. Royal decrees may still be issued without a government technically being in place: if the technocrats want a law passed, they just ask the King, rather than the politicians. Just check out the latest edition of the Belgian Official Journal (I know, as if you’re not a subscriber…).

And Belgium’s federal constitution, the cause of the absence of a government, is exactly what keeps the show on the road during this period. Even if a national government can’t be formed, Belgians still have six other governments: one representing each of the linguistic communities, and one representing each of the region. That’s enough government for anyone.

Belgium is a heavily socialised country, anyway, with the state involving itself in every facet of the civilians’ lives. Belgians are still forced to carry identity cards, pay their employees a ridiculously high minimum wage, and pay amongst the highest taxes in the world. So what if it doesn’t get any worse? It certainly isn’t getting any less burdensome.

Despite the claims by other bloggers that Belgium is some sort of Paradise Found, in which the absence of a few ministers is a panacea to the ills of any country, this is clearly not the case. What Belgium needs instead is a government in place, but a government that is actively committed to the withdrawal of the state from individuals’ lives. That way, not only would Belgians be able to boast that they don’t have a government, but they’ll be able to boast that they barely even have a state.