CIGARETTE BAN IN BARS A SIGN OF DIMINISHING CIVIL LIBERTIES.

Byline: SCOTT HOLLERAN

AS the new state law banning cigarette smoking in bars struggles to gain acceptance in the name of public health, serious questions remain: Is the new law meaningless, or does it represent a sinister philosophical trend? Advocates of the smoking ban herald the new restrictions in the name of public health.

And therein lies a hint of the true meaning of this latest step in the anti-smoking crusade.

The regulation of an individual's actions on private property is based on the same ideas that permitted the most brutal regimes of the 20th century.

If you accept that government is responsible for an individual's health, then you must reject the idea of personal responsibility and accept that government has the moral right to eradicate any perceived health threat from society ``by force.''

Acceptance of rule by force for the sake of the public good means an unconditional surrender of your rights - and acceptance of the government's arbitrary code of proper behavior.

Health risks associated with cigarette smoking are widely known - but the same is true of the health risks of drinking alcohol and coffee and eating red meat and eggs.

As nonsmoking computer consultant Larry Skubec told the Wall Street Journal, ``The next thing they're going to do is tell me I can't have a martini.''

It could happen. The smoking ban represents a real menace to freedom.

America was founded on the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Those who choose to patronize - or work at - a bar where customers are permitted to smoke are responsible for their own actions.

If a person believes the claim that secondhand smoke is harmful, he or she is free to patronize a smoke-free establishment. As nonsmoking Valley bartender JoAnne Roth told the Daily News, ``I'm willing to take the risk of working (in a bar where smoking is permitted).''

She added, ``I feel the government is slowly but surely taking away our rights.''

Roth clearly senses that prohibition of cigarette smoking in bars threatens her personal liberty - and it does.

The law is based on the concept that the end (ostensibly, protection of public health) justifies the means (restriction of the rights of smokers and restriction of the rights of bar owners to own and manage their property).

The violation of individual rights for the public good has been the moral premise of every tyranny known to man, from National Socialist Germany to the Soviet Union. It means that the individual is expendable for the sake of the collective.

Property is seized and controlled under both communism and fascism, though fascism offers the facade of private ownership; the National Socialists allowed a German businessman to own his business while they controlled, managed and operated his business. Similarly, those who own a bar are now permitted to own it - but not to control, manage and operate their property. Nazis seized the management of private property in the name of the Aryan race. The state has seized the management of California's bars in the name of public health.

Nazi attempts to eradicate smoking parallel the results of the current anti-smoking crusade. Those forced to join the Hitler Youth were forbidden from smoking - the Nazis smelled their breath. In 1939, SS chief Heinrich Himmler announced a smoking ban for all uniformed police and SS officers while on duty. Smoking was banned in many workplaces, hospitals, rest homes and government offices. Eventually, restaurants and cafes were barred from selling cigarettes.

Nevertheless, German smoking rates skyrocketed during Nazi rule. German per capita tobacco use between 1932 and 1939 rose from 570 to 900 cigarettes per year. The Nazi anti-smoking crusade had failed.

The war on cigarettes is a failure in America, too. Though state and federal governments spend millions of dollars on anti-smoking propaganda, smoking among teen-agers and adults is actually rising. While more Americans express a desire to stop smoking, more Americans are starting to smoke and, last week, the government abandoned its earlier goals to reduce smoking.

But the smoking ban is wrong not because it won't stop smoking - though it will neither prevent smoking in bars nor in cars or living rooms - it is wrong because fascism is wrong. Government regulation of individuals' actions and the operation of private property is a violation of our rights.