Governments = Useless? Always?

charlie.simm

Gigantic Websites Dot Com
Jul 6, 2007
1,550
26
48
There have been lots of interesting government-related debates on WF lately but I didn't find a thread which deals with one of the most important questions we should be asking ourselves:

Are governments ALWAYS useless?

In other words, do you think that society would be better off without governments (a system similar to the one market capitalists recommend) or would things work better if we keep them around but limit their power/involvement?

My 2 cents: governments suck at almost everything but eliminating them from the equation altogether would be a mistake.

Why?

If I run a company that has let's say 40 employees, that company can be extremely dynamic/flexible. As soon as a market trend emerges, we can react faster than a huge-ass corporation because there's no corporate ladder involved. No board meetings, nothing.

That's an important advantage and as a small company, we can make size work in our favor.

On the other hand, huge-ass corporations can make size work in their favor as well under certain circumstances. For example, when negotiating with suppliers, they can receive better offers due to the fact that they have more money at their disposal.

I'm pretty sure all of us can agree that small companies as well as huge companies have a well-deserved role in the financial ecosystem.

"Ok, whatever. But what does this have to do with governments?!?"

In my opinion, a government is similar to the previously mentioned huge-ass corporation when it comes to one important aspect: in some cases, size can work in its favor.

Can the private sector find better solutions to most problems? Yep.

Can the private sector react faster in most cases? Yep.

But what about military-related stuff, for example?

Here's a question I hope you guys can help me with:

Aren't there a few exceptions which make keeping the government around worth it?
 


Well the monthly Welfare checks sure seem to be "useful" the government is good for "taking care of us"
 
Well the monthly Welfare checks sure seem to be "useful" the government is good for "taking care of us"

OK, no more Welfare monies for lazy fucktards who refuse to work because milking the government is convenient, I think most WF members feel the same way.

But you didn't answer my question:

Aren't there a few exceptions which make keeping the government around worth it?

Or a slightly more elaborate question:

Do you think that society would be better off without governments or would things work better if we keep them around but limit their power/involvement?
 
The thing is you can call it a government or a King, or Monarch or whatever you would like, but you will always have someone controlling the money and that controls the people. I would rather have a government that the I can "elect" or can recall, versus one that 1 family controls for generations.
 
Government is just the most lucrative business in the world. I don't believe in governments, because at the end of the day, as any business - it is run by money. Who has the most money orders the music, government wise - big a$$ political sponsors.

And about wars - fuck, most governments start them and people end them. Fuck 'em.

Then again most people need some kind of "master", so a "democratic" government is best for them, IMO. But for people like you and me - self sufficient and "thinking" individuals, we don't need nobody to tell us what to do, and how to do it, it's common sense that we use.

"A government is like fire, a handy servant, but a dangerous master."
George Washington
 
There needs to be some form of organization/leadership, no one really wants anarchy. Yeah, so far governments haven't served their purpose correctly and end up fucking the citizens, but without them it would just be gangrape in the streets because most societies cant handle true freedom. Sad, but true. Human history consists of a minority of people fucking things up for everyone else, so it always shall be.
 
The sheer delusion of people on this board sometime amazes me...

I don't even care enough to write a post about it, but yeah, fuck governments. Let's just get rid of all of them, and we can all live in one huge lawless Somalia. That'd be grand! Then we'll be living in utopia...

I'll be the first to admit governments are massively bloated, have abused their powers, so on and so forth. But to say we don't need a government is ridiculously stupid.
 
One point to add.

Government comes from word "Govern", so it means someone that governs something - a city, state, country and people.

In history there have been many Governors that govern people, just with different names - Kings, Pharaohs, Churches and now we have Governments.

Like now we look back at history and think:"WTF, how could churches and their leaders govern over people with their rules and principles", so will couple of generations in future look back at us, and think:"WTF How could people believe in that shit?"

Masters stay, but only their forms of control and name change. Like I said above, most of the society need some kind of "master", be it a government, religion or whatever. But only a handful of people can successfully live on with common sense. That's what I advertise - fuck "letter servants", and use pure common sense everyday.

And one more thing about anarchy. Isn't it interesting that most people associate anarchy with utter Somalia-like chaos? Nice anti-propaganda isn't it?

You can't describe "anarchy", same as you can't describe "punk". It is a state of mind, not some pre-made form or style. Anarchy in Somalia is different what it would look like in America, or Denmark

It is the people that control the form of Anarchy. If Somalia is what it is now, it is because people wanted it that way or were to weak to fight those who wanted it different. If Freetown Christiania is what it is, it is because people wanted it that way. It all comes down to people and ourselves.
 
Anarchy isn't viable as long as there are other governments waiting to invade yo ass.
 
If there would be no people that believe the governments, there would be no governments lol. It is us - the people who, the government governs. If all together at once all the people of one government will "refuse" to be governed, what can the government do?

Without people's trust government is useless and powerless. No people that trust = no government.

That's why working together with others is so vital. Unite and win, or stay divided and fall.

But the "average Joe" hasn't even had a thought about it, and god forbid, actually started to do something. It is just too easy to live in the bubble. Wake up, go to work, come home, buy some shit, watch TV, repeat. Life without thinking and major action. Perfect.
 
Anarchy in Somalia is different what it would look like in America, or Denmark

Wanna bet? Shut down all publicly funded & subsidized services in LA for 72 hours. Law enforcement, fire department, ambulance, hospitals & public clinics, infrastructure for electric grid, sewer system, mass transit, highways, subsidized communication networks, and so on.

72 hours and LA would be a complete & total disaster. 6 weeks, it'd look pretty close to Somalia.

You guys railing on against government like this come off as a bunch of spoiled college kids, who completely take for granted everything society already has is place for you, as if all the "necessities" are just magically supposed to be there without any intervention.

I've been to probably over 30 countries, and have seen the contrast between big government, and almost no government at all. Gotta say, I'll stick with some government. Granted, many governments are currently bloated, and could definitely be taken down a notch or two.

And what's your big idea anyway? Get rid of your democratically elected government? Then what? You'll end up with a corporate dictator, and if you speak out against him, you'll end up in a 4x2 cell with no trial. Dumbass...
 
  • Like
Reactions: absolute
What Kiopa said x1000. Great post man, got nothing more to add. Sometimes I think these posters simply argue for the sake of it though. They have no idea what they're talking about, and just want to rage about something random. :)

And on that note - stop wasting time arguing with a troll. lol
 
No government != Lawless Somali wasteland.
That said, I'll refer to Thomas Paine for my stance on government:

Thomas Muthafucking Paine said:
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.

In reality we need very little government. We've become so desensitize to government intrusions that we fail to recall how truly overbearing it has become. Commerce Clause anyone? We leave it up to politicans to decide how our children should be educated, where we can buy milk, who we can marry, etc. All things we don't need the government for. Does anyone NEED government? No. But I want a small limited government subservient to the people to handle issues that an individual alone cannot...which we don't have.
 
You can't describe "anarchy", same as you can't describe "punk". It is a state of mind, not some pre-made form or style. Anarchy in Somalia is different what it would look like in America, or Denmark

It is the people that control the form of Anarchy. If Somalia is what it is now, it is because people wanted it that way or were to weak to fight those who wanted it different. If Freetown Christiania is what it is, it is because people wanted it that way. It all comes down to people and ourselves.
I am in love with you.
 
Law comes from the market, not from government.

Government != Law.

Then go move to Zimbabwe if you're so against the "government". Trust me, you won't receive much government interference over there. Might have some rival militias rolling by at 2am to rob, rape, and pillage you, but what the hell, at least it won't be the nasty government.

You'll probably only have sporadic electricity and running water, and on good days you'll be able to purchase gas from the station, but hey, at least the government won't be involved in your life.