Government Defined?
I recently read an article where the author claimed that, "Government, at its root, is an exchange of some amount of liberty for some amount of security." While that is definitely the sales pitch in school and media, this is a very poor definition, and for a couple key reasons.
First, there is no exchange. Governments demand obedience, and will rob, kidnap, or murder those who do not submit. Second, there is no security when any arbitrary government decree can turn a "legal" act or object into something "illegal" for which government enforcers will rob, kidnap, or murder people. In reality, a government is a group of people who claim a territorial monopoly in violence. Modern governments use the myth of representation as a veneer of legitimacy. They promise peace and prosperity if you submit to their demands, but the only real obligations are always imposed upon the populace. Governments are never held truly accountable, even if show trials and public wrist slaps occasionally occur.
A better definition of government, although still incomplete, just needs a slight rewording: "Government, at its root, is an exchange of liberty and security for illusions and lies." Don't fall for the propaganda spewed by busybody control freaks or their apologists.
Image credit
Related posts:
The Real Church and State Divide
What if No One is In Charge?
Post Hoc Econ
Virtue, Vice, and Violence
Old governments used the myth that god/gods had appointed the ruler. I'm not sure that's even worse than the myth government is based on today.
Interesting that Hong Kong people managed to change their proposed legislation, by mass marches.
Power to the People!!!
Two steps forward, one step back. The ratchet effect goes on. The presumed legitimacy of the State is preserved above all else. And the myth that they exchanged liberty for security remains unquestioned.
imagine filling the street in front of the white house with 2 - 3 million people, all yelling for one particular thing,
Then doing that day after day until all the rules/laws were changed.
Start your "crowd collecting, it could catch on"
What is achieved here, really?
There is some truth to this. If governments really represent us and protect our interests, why should we need to beg them for anything?
What is your other option.
Sit and bleat?
At least that were doing something to show their disapproval that got some attention, and probably the desired result, with no tanks running over them as well.
As a very young lad I was told. "if you don't like it, change it", if it is cold, light the fire, you won't get hotter sitting still.
The choice of either politics or inaction is a false dichotomy. Rejecting the former does not mean the latter by default.