[rayiner]

You've hit the nail on the head, but come to the wrong conclusion. Signals of the authority of government are good things, within reason. We are merely tribes of monkeys--without authority we'd do whatever the hell we wanted and that's not how civilization happens. The alternative to living under government authority isn't just peacefully building things and working with interesting technology. It's living under the authority of different thugs. Thugs we don't vote for, thugs we don't pay the salaries of, thugs we don't have any influence over.

My family comes from a country where the government has little authority (Bangladesh). It's not a good thing. People don't respect the law, and it's a deep moral failing of the country. It's a contemptible characteristic of the people. It's a hindrance to collective prosperity. I note with some amusement that tons of people like my father got the hell out of Bangladesh and moved to a country where he paid much more taxes, where there was much more regulation, much more oversight of society by government. Yet, not very many people seem to want to do the opposite.

[grandalf]

While I agree with your overarching point that it's a good thing when institutions gain legitimacy and authority, I think it's also important to appreciate the corrupting influences that exist within organizations. In the corporate world we have watchdog groups, regulatory agencies, etc. But for governments there are few checks and balances. The US Government has conducted a war on whistleblowers and watchdog groups.

In my view, the government is just the gang that drove out all the rival gangs and got rich enough to start laundering its reputation, rewriting history, etc.

Even in 2013, the atrocities committed by the US government are worse than those of nearly any criminal gang in the world. Consider rendition. Consider drone attacks on children.

[wtracy]

"Even in 2013, the atrocities committed by the US government are worse than those of nearly any criminal gang in the world."

I think you are greatly underestimating the criminal organizations of this world. Look into the Zetas cartel in Mexico, for example. Sure, American military strikes kill civilians, but we don't have a policy of targeting innocent civilians.

[grandalf]

Our rendition and torture programs are not governed by the rule of law and are known to take into custody many innocent people. The decision to carry on with these programs even though they are quite flawed is essentially the decision to carry out collateral damage on civilians... on purpose.

Also, don't be deceived and think that "smart" bombs and missles are smart enough to avoid lots of civilian casualties. They may be better than the previous technology was, but they are far from perfect, and considering that they are used outside of an actual war (targeted strikes in mostly civilian areas) there is definitely the deliberate tradeoff being made to commit some very horrible atrocities in the hope that the actual (though still extralegal) target is the one who gets killed.

And, when you consider the horrible regimes we support and fund (yet also turn on when their atrocities are exposed) it becomes clear that the US Government is the largest sponsor of human suffering in the world.

This is too bad, and it's escalated under Obama. Our militarism is out of control to the point where a massive propaganda effort must be used to keep the public supporting it. Smart bombs are actually propaganda bombs, b/c the footage can occasionally be used as part of the "good guy" narrative that is fed to the public.

I'm quite ashamed of this as an American citizen !