Quote:
Originally Posted by nonsqtr
Interesting. Very interesting. I definitely hear that argument, but, ah... I "may" have a counter-example for you. See what you think of this one:
Stupid people.
Stupid people are (or "can be") a "menace to society".
How're you gonna handle that one?  |
"Stupid" people would fall under the "evil" people argument.
If people are basically evil, why do you want to give them control over your peaceful, honest, voluntary actions via government? Likewise, if they are basically stupid, why do you want to give them control over your peaceful, honest, voluntary actions via government?
That argument is expanded upon here:
The Nature of Government
See also:
"THE WEAKEST ARGUMENT FOR GOVERNMENT
If we don't have government there will be chaos, disorder, crime, poverty, illiteracy, homelessness, drug abuse, pollution, etc, etc.
Answer 1: How do you know? Answer 2: Such a list almost always consists of problems we already suffer from - in other words, if we have government there will be chaos, disorder, crime, poverty, illiteracy, homelessness, drug abuse, pollution, etc, etc.
The people who call themselves "government" need such problems in order to justify their jobs. It is in their interest to create such problems and make them worse. The worse the problems, the bigger the bureaucratic empires they create, the more money they get, the more power they obtain, the more people they control.
The bigger the government, the greater the problems. A politician like Bush may say that he will reduce government and lower taxes because he thinks it will help him get re-elected. In practice Bush has greatly increased his own bureaucratic empire. His administration has expanded government regulation with abandon. He promised, "Read my lips, no new taxes," and then raised taxes. Under Bush, deficit spending has ballooned out of control."