That's not it either. In French, we have a quote coming from Beaumarchais, in Figaro's monologue: "Sans la liberté de blâmer, il n'est point d'éloge flatteur"

That's not it either. In French, we have a quote coming from Beaumarchais, in Figaro's monologue: "Sans la liberté de blâmer, il n'est point d'éloge flatteur" (without the freedom to blame there is no flattering praise). Equally, without the possibility of violence from the weak towards the strong (who has the power), there is no real social contract: that's the basis of societies, they hold because their hierarchy is accepted and supported by its members. Violence is a (last resort) mean to refuse the hierarchy in place. A democratic society is precisely one that functions in a way to detect and fix discrepancies in this acceptance and support without (and before) going to extreme means such as violence. And... it's a bit difficult to argue that private companies may solve public matters, especially when negotiation comes into play, in matters of scale and efficiency. The same way that monoliths still often beat microservices. Now, when scale and efficiency is not the focus per se, you may consider it's a very valid option to involve private actors. But in matters of taxes (roughly speaking) and of health/lives, it's perilous (as we can see) to make shareholders profits enter the equation of "scale and efficiency".