[mindcrime]

Wait, what?? Where did I say anything remotely like "trust no one"?

Trusting governments has worked out so well historically though. That got us many wars, untold numbers of people killed, incarcerated and/or experimented on. It got us untold numbers of people inhibited from creating wealth and a better future for themselves, so the existing elite power base could preserve itself. It got us civil asset forfeiture, the "War on Drugs" (aka, war on civil liberties), horrible nutritional advice promulgated by the USDA and their ilk, which has ruined people's health (hey, eat lots of carbs, fat is evil!). It's got us entrenched systems which promote the morality of one religious group (Christians, in the US) regardless of one's personal beliefs. It's got us MKULTRA, COINTELPRO, Room 641a, etc., etc.

[lightbyte]

Are you suggesting any alternate ideas here, or just ranting about "muh gubment"?

[thatswrong0]

All they're suggesting is that trusting the government is a silly idea, and then provided examples of it. I don't think they're suggesting necessarily that we need a brand new kind of government - just that we should for good reason be wary of the one we currently have.

[irickt]

"Government" is governance of humans by humans. It has never been "good" because the past is so dismal and because humans collectively have not come to make it good.

The challenge for those who critize government generically is that they design a good governance ... whether we call some part of it government or not.

[candiodari]

> Trusting governments has worked out so well historically though.

The absence of government, on the other hand, was even better. We have such incredible highlights as the dark ages, the Mongol conquest, islam's spread, ... each of which killed far more people than 40-45 including Japan and the Holocaust, when the total human population was a fraction of what it was during WWII. Collapses of government which are more recent, but on a smaller scale are currently used as laughingstocks for anarchists and ... sorry to say ... rightly so. Among such examples are Somalia, Ethiopia and Sudan as recent examples.

Without the government, can you really vouch for all 7 billion humans alive, even for basic things, such as that no group of them would commit mass murder, just because it would provide a better meal tomorrow evening ? How about all 300 million Americans ? I don't think so. How about 10 million New Yorkers ? I wouldn't take that bet.

The bet that they wouldn't band together and steal whatever they can is so ridiculous it's barely worth thinking about.

[krapp]

>Trusting governments has worked out so well historically though.

On balance, though, for most people, it actually has. Which creates a bit of a messaging problem for anarchy in the general case.