[Thiez]

> It's about having a monopoly on security and force, so the populace will be less independent and easier to manage.

Having an entity with a monopoly on violence is like half the point of a government. That's not a bug, it's a feature.

[roughcoat]

Uh huh. Have you studied the genocides of the 20th century? How does a disarmed and helpless populace look in those circumstances?

And since you think the government should be trusted to mete out all force, I'm certain you'll have no trouble handing the government all your passwords and keys, right? Maybe mail them a copy of your car keys and house keys too, since they're so trustworthy?

You trust them to protect your physical safety, to protect your life, if you're willing to hand over your right to self protection. Surely you then trust them with your data and property?

[Thiez]

> And since you think the government should be trusted to mete out all force, I'm certain you'll have no trouble handing the government all your passwords and keys, right? Maybe mail them a copy of your car keys and house keys too, since they're so trustworthy?

> You trust them to protect your physical safety, to protect your life, if you're willing to hand over your right to self protection. Surely you then trust them with your data and property?

I don't think that's the same thing at all. I trust my parents with my life, but I wouldn't want them to read my online conversations. They don't have a key to my house, nor the passwords to my computer and various accounts, and I'd like to keep it that way. I see no contradiction here.

[xg15]

> Have you studied the genocides of the 20th century?

Have you?

Before Hitler came to power, the Weimar government was destabilized by - among other things - a latent civil war between armed paramilitary extreme-left and extreme-right groups. Hitler himself relied on such groups (from the right) to stage his first attemt to come to power via a coup. Even after he got elected, the groups were a cornerstone of his power.