4 ms·
What the 'scale' appears to do, is to sugarcoat things which appears less hurtful for most people: 1)Eliminate individuals targeting other individuals at a per
by dennis_jeeves2 2y ago
What the 'scale' appears to do, is to sugarcoat things which appears less hurtful for most people:
1)Eliminate individuals targeting other individuals at a personal level on a routine basis.
2) An officially worded notice, as opposed to some thug threatening at you.
3) Some written text that has has a resembles of order call the 'law'. To give an analogy consider why religions texts appeal to people. People have a lot of reverence for the written word including areas where IMO it should not be relevant: example marriage.
To highlight my point, if a thug were to go around extorting people for money verbally on a periodic bases which are _less_ that the taxes currently paid and provided _more_ services than the government then the targeted individual of the extortion would more resentful than he/she would have been of the government.
- _heimdall 2y agoSo is your argument here that the scale of governments, and their willingness to write down the rules they want to impose, is better mainly due to optics? I.e. we're better off with governments because someone has to be in charge and a government at least appears to be better intentioned thugs due to their use of a pen and paper?
- dennis_jeeves2 2y agoGenerally correct. Put another way the government to a large extent are thugs. No, I personally am not sure if we are better of with governments. I have lived in places with virtually no government and those places have generally been better than the ones with the government.