Hi all

I have noticed a strong anti-government sentiment throughout many people I know in real life, and here on the Nexus. It's as if everybody has come to understand The Government as some evil people who are only out to take your money to use to restrict your freedoms and oppress you.

That's a sad thing to see.

Please bear with me, but I understand the government as the result of the following logical chain of thought:
As people are a flock animal (survival is hard when done "alone" and "independently" ) we have a natural tendency to live together in societies, close to each other. This enables specialization, as in every person is good at something different. Some people are good at chemistry, others at engineering, other people are good at fishing. The engineer is hopeless to survive without the fisherman and vice-versa. They both contribute to each other by making each other lives happier through contribution.

A good society increases in size, because the people living together have been successful at helping each other to have more healthy children. Outsiders also join the society because it is successful and promises a chance at a better / happier life, thus making it bigger.

As the size of society increases, the amount of possible specializations increase, as does the complexity of what each person specializes in. With this, the complexity of the interactions between people increases and the possibility of miscommunication and misunderstanding also increases.

The ability of the collective society also increases - so they all agree that they should do something together to make all of their lives better and more enjoyable. For example, they decide that they should have a communal party building.
But who should pay for it? Should the expense lay on the shoulders of the builders? Or should it be the community as a whole who should pitch in?

Here, I think, is where a Government should be born and where it is a good thing. I know our current governments around the world are full of flaws, but how can we expect humans to be perfect all the time? Life is an experiment, and government is an experiment.

I am 100% pro-government even with it's current flaws, because if all people in the world, together decide a minimal living standard for everyone, nobody will be left behind hungry or needing anything. We need to improve our systems until they are good, and then continue improving them so they get better. So it is with science, so it should be with our government of ourselves.

Just as I once realized that there is not a "God vs. Us" but only "We are a part of what is God", so I believe there is no "Government vs Us" but "We are a part of what is Government". We are all responsible for how everything is happening because whether we want it or not, we are a part of what is happening.

Democracy has tried to implement the collective self-government for the betterment of all but has so far failed, because the people we elect are not good decision-makers but good at-getting-elected. In our naivety, we have come to select the wrong specialization for the right job.

Does anybody follow with my chain of thoughts? Do you disagree? Please enlighten me with how I can be wrong.

you should check out the venus project for a realistic, comprehensive view of how governments are outdated, and how we can exist without them.

also it should be noted that structures were fabricated before a government system was established.

Thanks, I will read about it with great interest. I've thought long and hard about HOW we can possibly live together successfully without a "government" to help us make these big projects and delegations to make it possible... guess someone has thought about it longer and harder.

What do you mean by "structures were fabricated before a government system was established"?

Maybe governments should have an off-switch, just like TV´s.

something like this
though, admittedly, it is impossible to know for sure if government systems were established or not in pre-historic times.

My take on it is that the progression of society which you describe, and which requires a formal "government", is what has led up to the destruction of the planet. There's much more to be said on the issue, but that's the basis of my understanding.

How do you come to that conclusion? What is inherent in government as a concept, that makes the planet go bad?

I see it as the faulting of capitalism and the pursuit of personal prosperity above all others.

You believe the structures there were created without the help of organization (ie: government)? As in, hundreds of individuals just chipped away at the rocks according to their own will and without a common goal or any inter-personal structuring, achieved to build these impressive structures?

Do you think we could build something like the pyramids without establishing a governing body to oversee that everybody is helping build the pyramid according to plan? If so, how so?

I agree that it's silly we have "our government" and "their government" and "country borders" and "this is my land" and "this is your land".

As far as I understand about the venus project, so far (and i have only seen one video on the About page so excuse my ignorance), is that the idea is to create one common government across the entire planet that serves the benefit of everybody instead of "us vs them".

If you decide to throw a party where 100 people have to participate and pitch in, how will you do so without a governing body?

government was not , is not and never will be here for us ordinary people. sooner you understand this better for you.

politicians do not care about us. they only pretend to do so but they do not. I am very against government.

government = evil

Again I am told that the idea of a government is evil yet you ignore my pleas that we have not yet perfected the art of good government.
Many ideas have gone through failed experiments before they were successful. WD40 means "Water Displacemement, Attempt 40" just to name one.

All the best things in life come through a series of failures.

If you think of government as "Us, the people, coming together, to create a better place to live for mankind" then what part of Government is inherently evil?

From wikipedia:


How would you build roads without a government? How would you have free public healthcare without government and taxes? How would you help the weak people who are unable to work, without a government?

I live in a country where government has created really great free medical care for EVERYBODY for free - and free university education for free - i do not believe that such things would be possible without a government.

Why is government evil? Do you not simply think that "our current attempts at government have yet failed"?

Parshvik Chintan told me to read up about The Venus Project. I've done so, and thanks for the link: This is an idea I can fully support. I too believe that the planet, and humanity, will be better off forming one united government - and people - and reclaim all resourses as Mans common heritage, and the planet as all ours together responsibility. But this is not possible without a government - and I haven't seen any arguments as to how it would be possible without government.

Everybody both left and right hates the government, yet everybody fails to see the good that a government could do if it were not full of bad people who are good at getting power, not governing.

Why is it that everything I write is ignored and replied with a knee-jerk reaction? I thought that of all places, the Nexus would be a place where people could read a full post and reply to it in context. And I thought that here, people could see the value of coming together to work for the betterment of all.

I think having government is a very necessary thing ( the necessary evil.)

People need police to protect them from other evil and dangerous people like thieves and rapists. ( government)

People gather resources to educate children through organization ( government.)

Fires get put out by funding fire stations ( government)

Roads get built to drive on ( government)

Of course government is needed, and of course it goes way too far at many times ( like curtailing many of our freedoms,) and certainly not far enough at other times.

In my opinion, anyone that thinks this many people in a country can live without government is engaging in childish fantasy and shouldn't be taken seriously, and should have had a better education in social sciences. How many places in this world do you know of where large amounts of people live together with no government at all??? None...and why is that? Maybe people who think no government should exist have such a great idea that nobody is doing it? really? lol...

Do we need the current exact form of government? I think no, that it could and should change a great deal. But even a tribe of 10 people making decisions to work together is in fact then a government that makes rules and likely some f&^ked up decisions at times!

Governments suck so much because people are full of fear, greed, and hate, its human nature. People use the power of government to forward those agendas of course. But if it were not for some sort of organized effort to educate you, feed you, build your house, give you electricity to power your computer, etc, etc, you wouldn't be here typing on this forum.

How much longer do you expect your government institution to last? What happens when we suddenly find ourselves extracting less oil than our growing economies require (a action stimulated by governments/people who are blinded with the idea of consuming and growing ever more BP controlled the coast guard when they spilled oil all over the gulf). The way society is structured as it stands is not sustainable, and the entire culture is to blame, the government runs the show (in theory at least, but not in reality), thus it takes a disproportionate amount of the blame.

I don't think thats true. Most people on the left understand the role of government I think . The left mostly understands that our parents built all this infrastructure in which we live, the roads, schools, hospitals. Its mainly the angry right wingers and tea-party nutjobs who act like every penny of tax they have to pay is wrong...I wish they would just go live on their own in the woods then and stop trying to be total a&*hole obstructionists.
There seems to be a raised tenor of anger these days at everything! Many people just love to spread hate and love to bitch about everything and feel no sense of responsibility to anyone but themselves....very sad.

Your point? I think you're just playing the role of a streetcorner doom prophet.
Even if you are right that the government is going to collapse ( I don't know when you are predicting this,) what should be done? You offer no suggestion other that talking like chicken little.

a government is necessary for a common goal?
organization cannot occur without electing someone to lead over others?



kinda, except no government, just people and technology working together to create a sustainable lifestyle


lots and lots of communication. (e.g. recently there was a death of a loved one, so all the udzihyu clan came together to throw a pot-latch for the other 3 clans; close to 100 people organized a party for everyone else without establishing a government of any kind)

"Man is capable of living in society, governing itself by laws self-imposed, and securing to its members the enjoyment of life, liberty, property, and peace." --Thomas Jefferson

Pretty much, no.

There has to be go to people. People get appointed to buy the beer ( call it an election.) The guy who gets the beer might have to collect the money for it before he hands it out....so now he is enforcing rules...he's the leader of the beer stand. Without him, there would be no beer. Its pretty basic if you don't ignore the way people work together in the real world!

>amount of beer needed is noted
>amount of money needed to fund said beer is raised.
>the money is then given to anyone who can go buy beer
>the volunteer driver is now a leader?
he is a worker, not a leader; without him there would still be beer, just delivered by someone else.

Semantics. Someone is assigned and responsible to do something. Call him a worker or a leader, he is a designee.
He is a leader when it comes time to decide who can have how much beer based upon the amount they paid.

re-read what i posted.
he decides nothing, excepting that he is willing to drive.
the amount of beer/money is decided beforehand, and that number is determined by the amount of guests.
so unless he invited every guest personally, he has no control over the amount of beer he buys; unless he decides to only buy some of the beer he was supposed to (but i can't think of motivation for that)

he leads nothing
he is not a leader.

What happens when the world's beer supply is controlled by a very few? Who provides oversight? Who prevents price gouging? Who makes sure that the beer isn't tainted with hexavalent chromium?