4 ms·

Well, governments are coercive forces with a total monopoly on the legal system and the use of violence. Perhaps monopolies being bad is reason enough? There ar

Well, governments are coercive forces with a total monopoly on the legal system and the use of violence. Perhaps monopolies being bad is reason enough? There are the hundreds of millions (billions?) of people murdered by governments throughout history, including the many atrocities modern governments are committing today, which is almost surely reason enough. And then there are the philosophical arguments against political authority, called philosophical anarchism, which can be quite convincing. It seems the onus is on the other side to justify the state, and that we should't be trying to find alternative solutions to the problems it attempts to solve.

vrganj 6mo ago
In a democratic society, government is the representative of the people. It is also the only entity powerful enough to stand up to other monopolies, businesses, which are dictatorships without any democratic control. There will always be a power structure. I'd prefer one I can vote out. The fundamental flaw in any type of libertarian / anarchist thinking is denying the reality that power will always be concentrated somehow. The libertarian fantasy would result in neofeudalism, if theres no state to stop it.
- arto 6mo ago
  Corporations are state-created and state-protected entities. Remove limited liability and other special state privileges from businesses and you'll have a lot less to complain about.
  - vrganj 6mo ago
    The concentration of wealth and thus power is inherent to capitalism. No state needed.
- slopinthebag 6mo ago
  > In a democratic society, government is the representative of the people. Representative of who exactly? Generally governments around the world win with <50% of the vote. Those who vote make up a small fraction of the population. Of those who voted for the winning party, only a small fraction of them actually feel fully represented by their party - often people vote strategically, or they vote for the "lesser evil" rather than voting for a representative who wholly represents their views. The rest have a government who are not representative of them in power over them. Hardly representative of the people.
  - vrganj 6mo ago
    That might be a problem of the specific state you live in. Some systems are better at representing the people than others.
igor47 6mo ago
But in a democracy, you at least have input! Google is also a coercive force with no real checks on its power, but it doesn't care about anything you have to say. That's the difference, that's it, right there. The answer to abuse of power is not to just unleash raw power, its to subordinate and restrict it. That's what government is for. When you find yourself arguing that power you participate in is bad and shouldn't restraint power you have 0 influence in, that's when it's time to wonder if they've gotten to you.
- slopinthebag 6mo ago
  The amount of input we have is virtually zero. I have never had a candidate I felt represented me, I have never had a candidate who I voted for win an election, and I have never had a a party who the candidate voted for win an election. Thus my minuscule "input" had absolutely zero impact, both in elections and on my life as a whole. The reason democracy is better than other forms of governance is that it provides incentives for those in power which are better aligned with the upholding of human rights and protection against abuse. Myself casting a vote every few years is de facto meaningless.
  - dehsge 6mo ago
    If you are in the US. Proportionate representation stopped completely with the Reapportionment Act of 1929. Subsequently the tail end of the gilded age and enacted in June 18, only 5months before the crash of oct 1929. Constitutionally the size of the US government was expected to scale proportionally with population and 3/5ths of slaves. This is why your vote ‘feels’ meaningless. We have been under a state of corporate capture for coming up to 100years. Last time there was push back from congress we got the Powell memo. That memo reinforces and defends corporate power in American politics.
    - slopinthebag 6mo ago
      No, I live in a country under the Westminster system.
    - watwut 6mo ago
rini17 6mo ago
Since monopolies make stuff scarce and expensive, you basically want free market for violence, it should be be cheap and abundant? And all the DDoS and crytocurrency extortions and scams should extend to meatspace too, and you would be okay with it because it's supposedly still better than what govts do?

vrganj 6mo ago

In a democratic society, government is the representative of the people. It is also the only entity powerful enough to stand up to other monopolies, businesses, which are dictatorships without any democratic control. There will always be a power structure. I'd prefer one I can vote out. The fundamental flaw in any type of libertarian / anarchist thinking is denying the reality that power will always be concentrated somehow. The libertarian fantasy would result in neofeudalism, if theres no state to stop it.

arto 6mo ago
Corporations are state-created and state-protected entities. Remove limited liability and other special state privileges from businesses and you'll have a lot less to complain about.
- vrganj 6mo ago
  The concentration of wealth and thus power is inherent to capitalism. No state needed.
slopinthebag 6mo ago
> In a democratic society, government is the representative of the people. Representative of who exactly? Generally governments around the world win with <50% of the vote. Those who vote make up a small fraction of the population. Of those who voted for the winning party, only a small fraction of them actually feel fully represented by their party - often people vote strategically, or they vote for the "lesser evil" rather than voting for a representative who wholly represents their views. The rest have a government who are not representative of them in power over them. Hardly representative of the people.
- vrganj 6mo ago
  That might be a problem of the specific state you live in. Some systems are better at representing the people than others.

igor47 6mo ago

But in a democracy, you at least have input! Google is also a coercive force with no real checks on its power, but it doesn't care about anything you have to say. That's the difference, that's it, right there. The answer to abuse of power is not to just unleash raw power, its to subordinate and restrict it. That's what government is for. When you find yourself arguing that power you participate in is bad and shouldn't restraint power you have 0 influence in, that's when it's time to wonder if they've gotten to you.

slopinthebag 6mo ago
The amount of input we have is virtually zero. I have never had a candidate I felt represented me, I have never had a candidate who I voted for win an election, and I have never had a a party who the candidate voted for win an election. Thus my minuscule "input" had absolutely zero impact, both in elections and on my life as a whole. The reason democracy is better than other forms of governance is that it provides incentives for those in power which are better aligned with the upholding of human rights and protection against abuse. Myself casting a vote every few years is de facto meaningless.
- dehsge 6mo ago
  If you are in the US. Proportionate representation stopped completely with the Reapportionment Act of 1929. Subsequently the tail end of the gilded age and enacted in June 18, only 5months before the crash of oct 1929. Constitutionally the size of the US government was expected to scale proportionally with population and 3/5ths of slaves. This is why your vote ‘feels’ meaningless. We have been under a state of corporate capture for coming up to 100years. Last time there was push back from congress we got the Powell memo. That memo reinforces and defends corporate power in American politics.
  - slopinthebag 6mo ago
    No, I live in a country under the Westminster system.
  - watwut 6mo ago

rini17 6mo ago

Since monopolies make stuff scarce and expensive, you basically want free market for violence, it should be be cheap and abundant? And all the DDoS and crytocurrency extortions and scams should extend to meatspace too, and you would be okay with it because it's supposedly still better than what govts do?