Nice one. I do often find that many people will define the word "government" as something like "a system which organises a society", and so it's difficult for them to see the idea that government involves violence, or to see why a society which isn't based on violence would be desirable.
As an aside, I like how things are a little more literal in Spanish. "Impuestos" (impositions) is a common word for taxes in Mexico. Everyone knows that an imposition isn't voluntary, and when I tell someone that taxation is theft, it's thoroughly uncontroversial.
Perhaps that's why it seemed to me that among so many in Mexico, there was a general attitude of understanding that the government enforcers were something to just attempt to go around and avoid, but not something to respect, or worship.
I got a sense that they see them as what they are -- another irritant, another violent gang to be just barely tolerated, maybe appeased, but certainly not treated as a benevolent necessity.
Yes, that's pretty much the attitude. Except when it comes to voting time, then everybody gets the idea that things are gonna change.
The weird thing about it, which I still haven't figured out, is that, in a statist country, people are ready to argue with you about it, and after a while (perhaps months) of calmly answering their questions, they say "I guess you're right" or "I'll have to take this perspective into consideration in future discussions" or they become advocates in some sense. But in Mexico, when I explain my position, often people just say "Hm... that's interesting". It's a little puzzling - without a strong resistance, it's hard to know where to go.