Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41
Thanks Tree35Thanks

Thread: Why do we have government, considering all the people that constantly attack it.....

  1. #1
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    14,846
    Thanks
    12346

    From
    Here

    Why do we have government, considering all the people that constantly attack it.....

    .....Is it government people dislike or is it just that they would prefer the government be customized to their world view and allow them to have all the freedom they desire, while blocking anything that would interfere with it?

    Are the people calling for fewer regulations and less government doing so on the basis that they believe people are just naturally predisposed to do the right thing or are they really the people that want to be free of regulations to rape and pillage and rip their fellow human beings off, with nothing to hold them accountable for doing so?

    These are questions - Please try to answer and discuss.

  2. #2
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    62,680
    Thanks
    31367

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by KnotaFrayed View Post
    .....Is it government people dislike or is it just that they would prefer the government be customized to their world view and allow them to have all the freedom they desire, while blocking anything that would interfere with it?
    People do not seem to mind government as long as it does what they want it to.

    Quote Originally Posted by KnotaFrayed View Post
    Are the people calling for fewer regulations and less government doing so on the basis that they believe people are just naturally predisposed to do the right thing or are they really the people that want to be free of regulations to rape and pillage and rip their fellow human beings off, with nothing to hold them accountable for doing so?
    The latter.

  3. #3
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    33,109
    Thanks
    28277

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by KnotaFrayed View Post
    .....Is it government people dislike or is it just that they would prefer the government be customized to their world view and allow them to have all the freedom they desire, while blocking anything that would interfere with it?

    Are the people calling for fewer regulations and less government doing so on the basis that they believe people are just naturally predisposed to do the right thing or are they really the people that want to be free of regulations to rape and pillage and rip their fellow human beings off, with nothing to hold them accountable for doing so?

    These are questions - Please try to answer and discuss.
    We should shrink government until it is small enough that we can DROWN it in a bathtub!!

    Oh. Wait. That was Grover Norquist. I don't even LIKE Grover Norquist. I think he is the leader of a dangerous new religion/cult. We can call it Quistianity. Or perhaps it might be better to call it Quistinsanity.

    It certainly is a heretical version of Christianity, that Jesus Himself would not approve of.
    Thanks from MaryAnne, Devil505, labrea and 1 others

  4. #4
    A Blue Dog Jets Fan Jets's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    20,408
    Thanks
    8061

    From
    New York

    Why do we have government, considering all the people that constantly attack it.....

    Peoples views on what should constitute government are subjective. It seems rules and regulations are ok as long as itís applied to someone else and as long as it doesnít increase my taxes. Itís this type of ambivalence that makes it near impossible to run effectively.

    Jmo
    Thanks from KnotaFrayed

  5. #5
    The Un-Holy One The Man's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    37,901
    Thanks
    22760

    From
    Toronto
    Organized government is necessary. Otherwise, there would be no laws, and just anarchy...
    Thanks from KnotaFrayed

  6. #6
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    33,109
    Thanks
    28277

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by The Man View Post
    Organized government is necessary. Otherwise, there would be no laws, and just anarchy...
    According to Thomas Hobbes, life for Man in the original state of nature, i.e., before government, was "nasty, poor, brutish, solitary, and short".

    And he was right about all of that, EXCEPT for the 'solitary' part. We have NEVER been solitary animals; we have ALWAYS lived in societies, going back to our earliest anthropoid ancestors. Monkeys and apes are all very social animals. [There are only a few nocturnal species of monkey which are exceptions to this rule.] The mountain man who chooses to go off and live a solitary life is the very rare exception. Most people WANT the company of their fellow men.

    So, for most of our existence, we lived in societies where organized government really was NOT necessary. We did not have formal laws, but neither was there anarchy. Instead, we were ruled by tradition, and custom. Organized government did not come along until our societies became too COMPLEX to be ruled by tradition and custom alone. When the first CITIES arose. City-states need governments. That much is clear. Towns are an intermediate case. Villages can be ruled by tradition, by councils of village elders, without laws that are written down anywhere.

    Interesting subject.

  7. #7
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    14,846
    Thanks
    12346

    From
    Here
    I agree with most if not all what people have said in their responses thus far and will refer to a quote by James Madison that ponders the same question in some ways as a means to present reasons for the form of government settled on, by the founders, one Lincoln later described as "a government of the people, by the people and for the people" and as such, will not perish from the earth. Since then the argument has been that our government has moved away from being one "of the people, by the people and for the people" and that perhaps some forms of "free speech" or peaceable assembly for redress have come in the form of dollar amounts and lobbying that serve special interests above the interests of "the people". An argument could be made that is not so much "government" that is the problem many people refer to when they blame "government", but the corruptions of "a government of the people, by the people and for the people", those who initially allowed the corruptions and those who have allowed them to continue, have perpetuated them, added to them or exacerbated them. This goes back to the question of how "a government of the people, by the people and for the people" might become one that no longer represents the people over special interests, who has been involved in the corruptions, over a long period or shorter period and why?

    More importantly, how does American society reverse the corruptions, if government has become one 'of the corrupt, by the corrupt and for the corrupt'?

    "But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."
    The Avalon Project : Federalist No 51

    My views on government or non-government entities, including private corporations, is that as bodies or sectors of a society neither is all good, neither is all bad and either can have a make-up of good and bad people and the volume or balance of each can influence their actions at any moment in time and that over time (short or long) that make-up, can change to the opposite. This is perhaps why it is important to weigh entities and their actions on an individual basis. Still, that is difficult as we all do not have all the details of every situation all the time and most of all, for most of us, the information we get about anything, does not come from being personally involved, but from others.

    Thanks for your responses, would like to hear more people join in.
    Last edited by KnotaFrayed; 13th June 2018 at 05:33 PM.
    Thanks from The Man and MaryAnne

  8. #8
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    33,109
    Thanks
    28277

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by KnotaFrayed View Post
    I agree with most if not all what people have said in their responses thus far and will refer to a quote by James Madison that ponders the same question in some ways.

    "But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."
    The Avalon Project : Federalist No 51

    My views on government or non-government entities, including private corporations, is that as bodies or sectors of a society neither is all good, neither is all bad and either can have a make-up of good and bad people and the volume or balance of each can influence their actions at any moment in time and that over time (short or long) that make-up, can change to the opposite. This is perhaps why it is important to weigh entities and their actions on an individual basis. Still, that is difficult as we all do not have all the details of every situation all the time and most of all, for most of us, the information we get about anything, does not come from being personally involved, but from others.

    Thanks for your responses, would like to hear more people join in.
    There is a reason, or multiple reasons actually, as to why we call James Madison 'the Father of the Constitution'. He was also our most brilliant political philosopher among all our Founding Fathers. The quote you chose from Federalist No 51 is one of his most famous, and very apropos to this discussion. Here is another quote by George Washington that I find very apropos to the same topic or subject: "The purpose of government is to find the happy medium between tyranny on the one hand and anarchy on the other."


    George Washington did not have the higher education that many of our other Founding Fathers could boast of, but he was richly blessed with common sense and eloquence, nonetheless.

  9. #9
    Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    3,015
    Thanks
    657

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by KnotaFrayed View Post
    .....Is it government people dislike or is it just that they would prefer the government be customized to their world view and allow them to have all the freedom they desire, while blocking anything that would interfere with it?

    Are the people calling for fewer regulations and less government doing so on the basis that they believe people are just naturally predisposed to do the right thing or are they really the people that want to be free of regulations to rape and pillage and rip their fellow human beings off, with nothing to hold them accountable for doing so?

    These are questions - Please try to answer and discuss.
    Your premise is simplistic and absurd. It's not that government shouldn't exist, but rather that concentration of power should be avoided as it leads to despotism and tyranny.
    Since government is made up of the same fallible humans as the governed we need to be aware that there will always be a tendency for government to attract corrupt individuals who will wield power for their personal advantage. Politicians aren't necessarily wiser, more competent, more honest, more virtuous and more conscientious than the people they serve, but quite often the reverse. Government can't solve all our problems; government isn't wise and beneficent, it's heavy handed and impersonal. Empowering government to be responsible on behalf of people who are capable of responsibility for themselves is a problem because government should never be unnecessarily empowered, but instead kept on a short leash.
    Also a rather important point that liberals often miss is that local government is more responsive to the people than centralized and distant government. It's folly to empower the state or federal government to perform a function when local government is perfectly capable of fucking it up. But at least the individuals responsible for the latest local boondoggle will likely need to find a new career soon enough, whereas Nancy Pelosi still has a job. Can you just imagine how badly they'd fuck up national healthcare, managed from Washington, for 350 million people? And they can't seem to handle the VA as it is.
    Last edited by Otto Throttle; 13th June 2018 at 05:38 PM.
    Thanks from orangecat and GoaTlOver

  10. #10
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    14,846
    Thanks
    12346

    From
    Here
    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    There is a reason, or multiple reasons actually, as to why we call James Madison 'the Father of the Constitution'. He was also our most brilliant political philosopher among all our Founding Fathers. The quote you chose from Federalist No 51 is one of his most famous, and very apropos to this discussion. Here is another quote by George Washington that I find very apropos to the same topic or subject: "The purpose of government is to find the happy medium between tyranny on the one hand and anarchy on the other."


    George Washington did not have the higher education that many of our other Founding Fathers could boast of, but he was richly blessed with common sense and eloquence, nonetheless.
    Thank you BigLeRoy.......there are more, but the one you have pointed out and the example of Washington's education as compared to others offers an example of someone who perhaps had a desire to be educated instead of rejecting the educated and the educations of others, he appears to have educated himself to understand and stand with those who were more formally educated. Today, it is disturbing that some seem to exhibit or demonstrate an attitude that being educated is synonymous with being an "elitist" in the derogatory sense of the word, not the objective, practical and non-derogatory sense of the word. For example, when people refer to elite athletes, they are not generally referring to people they think are snobbish and vain, but the very top athletes in whatever sport they participate in. Currently, among some people, simply being formally educated or working to be an informed and intelligent person is considered being an elitist in the derogatory sense of the word, as if being intelligent or wanting to be is wrong. In my view and experience there are highly educated people who are simply fabulous and at the same time, very humble and interested in hearing and learning from even the least educated. Then there are those that demonstrate an attitude that their education makes them the smartest person to ever walk the earth. They are vain and condescending to people who they deem to be less educated and they don't want to hear anything anyone else has to say, because they know it all. While it may seem surprising, I have found some of the same attitudes among less formally educated people. There are some incredibly intelligent and well informed people who never had a formal education, but wanted to be educated and intelligent and there are those who simply poo poo any education or desire to be intelligent or informed and they seem to justify this attitude with a sort of cognitive dissonance by suggesting they don't need or want to be educated because in their mind being educated makes one an elitist snob.
    Last edited by KnotaFrayed; 14th June 2018 at 11:58 AM.
    Thanks from BigLeRoy

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 14th November 2015, 08:10 AM
  2. Attack on Faith? Seriously? These people are idiots
    By TennesseeRain in forum Current Events
    Replies: 348
    Last Post: 24th June 2015, 11:58 PM
  3. Federal Government Suffers Massive Hacking Attack
    By BigMaS in forum Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 5th June 2015, 12:47 AM
  4. Is America "a government of the people, for the people and by the people", OR?
    By lucyflyinginthesky in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 9th February 2015, 04:19 AM
  5. U.S. Government Uses Al-Qaeda To Attack Iran
    By Robodoon in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 29th May 2007, 01:28 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed