I’m inspired by a recent thread made by Void_X_Zero regarding anarchic government.

What is ‘Government’?

Answering his questions, I realized that what people refer to as “The Government” is an abstraction of what they believe, personally and subjectively, is political power. People imagine “TG” according to their knowledge, wisdom, ideals, and imagination. It is according to their belief-systems and faith, that people conceive the notion of power and authority. Thus all forms of TG are abstractions of power, based on that authority, and its rationalization/justification.

For example, Modern US is democratic, a “Democracy”. Why is it this way? Mostly because people believe it is this way, and ought to be this way. However Democracy, actually, is simply mob-rule. It is “majority takes all”, 51% speaks for the other 49%. And because Democracy is this way, it is fundamentally flawed. It is obviously irrational to claim that 51% of the population speaks for, or represents, the 49% minority. Furthermore, about Democracy, it is a rather infantile, immature, and feminine ideology. It is based on emotions, how people feel rather than what is Righteous or True. For example, Science is not Democratic. You can’t vote on whether Gravity exists. Majority-vote does not win, with Science. Thus different ideologies require different fundamental patterns, logic, and order.

A “Scientific” styled government would be Autocratic, ruled by (scientific-intellectual) elites and professors.

Governments come and go throughout history, and generally represent the “will of the people”. When political leaders exploit the “will of the people” then anything can happen, as with the rise of Nazi and Hitler in Germany. Governments can change, based on the challenges of certain centuries or eras. Earthly environments are never static, and always changing, despite the human instinct to create and maintain, to preserve a ‘civil’ manipulation. Humanity tries to impose Artifice (civilization) upon Nature. The wild is manufactured into concrete jungles.

Government is a genetic expression. The East Asian, Chinese, for example, are Totalitarian Communists. Because they are a strongly and distinctly homogeneous race, with very little or no racial mixing, for thousands of years. The Chinese civilization and empire is exclusive, not inclusive, scrutinizing to foreigners, anti-individualistic, severely socialistic, and expelled the Mongolian tribes and hordes long ago. The expulsion of the Mongols, by the Chinese, in more ancient history, caused them to spread outward to new lands, including the Americas, first Native American Indians, and also into the Philippines, an example today would be the Samoan tribes whom the Mongols intermixed with Philippine residents.

Governments are the results of centuries of “civil progress”. Western European civilization is dominated by Græco-Roman culture, history, and warfare. Western governments and people are more “Universalist”, multi-cultural, “tolerant”, and liberal. This is because, over centuries, the dominating Roman culture integrated conquered peoples (slaves) into their society, causing fractures, chaos, revolts, rebellions (anarchy), which had to be quelled from time to time, using physical force and military arms. Judaism is representative of this antagonism between early European Romans, and slave societies, whom Jews-Semites-Hebrews appealed to and seduced with the Abrahamic God. Rome eventually absorbed the slave masses and Jews as well, by forming the ideology of Christianity, which before that, was called Stoicism. Stoics were used to suppress slave uprisings, some of the times, instigated purposely by Jews, who never accepted, and to this day still reject, the Papacy of Rome. In later centuries, Jews appealed to Northern European pagans, forming alliances under the guise of “Protestantism”. The enemy of my enemy (Rome), is my friend, hence Jews slowly intermingled throughout Europe across the centuries.

Western history of Government is extensive, and I cannot go in depth so quickly, so I’ll return to my main point.

Governments, ultimately, are reflections of people, their character, their beliefs, and most importantly, representative of their Faith. Everybody has ‘Faith’ in one form or another. Everybody has conceptions of “Authority”. And when you investigate the primary conception of Authority of any individual, that is the root of what he or she knows of “The Government”.

Government as a concept is a violent conspiring deceptive gang of individuals that enforce their worldy perspectives on others by military and police along with profiting off the masses economically that they entrap into their society from cradle to grave. Let’s not sugar coat what governments actually are and pretend that there is a will of the people involved. We all know the will of the people idealism is bullshit along with the social contract or representative body politic.

Not judging of course merely reflecting here on what a government is, I think central governments need some competition where all groups of people can create their own governments and societies as they see fit independently. :wink:

Why shouldn’t people be allowed to create their own governments and societies? Why should people settle for what they’re born into? Why should one group of people have a monopoly on initiating a government or society? If it’s good for them then it should be good for everybody else to follow suit in the same manner. Maybe some people don’t want to live under one variation of government where they seek to live under and be directed by another. :wink:

How is the “violent gang” not the will of the people?

The so called will of the people depicts a general consensus amongst people in a society. I would argue no such consensus exists.

The violent gang of government serves itself and inner circle only. It cares about its subjects last and sometimes not all.

Again, you unwittingly suggest the SAM Co-op, but to answer your question; people aggregate and subdue, if not kill off, other people so as to gain more of whatever they desire. The end result is what you see around you (as you noted). Who would protect the peaceful tribe from a much more aggressive and nastier tribe? Whoever that is, is the “government” via protectionism.

No, I said co-ops don’t work. Nobody would protect the peaceful tribe if the tribe can’t protect itself. This world is one of inequality, brutality, and unfairness. The weak perish or are enslaved.

Also, the only way people would be allowed to go forward to create their own governments or societies is by going to war against the current government that they find themselves subjugated under now. This is the way it is.

The will of the people is the will of the “violent gang”.

Once again, there is no will of the people, the will of the people is whatever a government says it is.

So you’re claiming that governments are not comprised of people? People have will, wants, desires. The “violent gang” you’re hypothetically referring to, is comprised of people, therefore, comprised of will.

You’re wrong.

Will of the people as an idealistic concept means consent by a majority of people and it is that what I am saying doesn’t exist. You should perhaps familiarize yourself with political expressions before opening your mouth.

Governments are controlled by a tiny minority of individuals, once again stfu!

If you had read the OP then you should note that I specifically mentioned that The Government reflects the will of those who run it, not some separate entity or society. You’re misusing the term. You’re claiming that the “will of the people” is other than the “violent gang”. I’m saying that the will of the people is the violent gang.

You’re disassociating. It’s like claiming to be a victim of the government, and “the government does not represent me”, when, sometimes it does and other times it does not. So you’re using the western ideal as your standard. I also mentioned this subjective, personal interpretation of governments too.

While you define government as “a violent gang”, a christian on the other hand, would perhaps define government as the Archdiocese, Bishops, and Pope, the “holy order of god and saints”, etc. Therein the will of the people (christians) would be a religious order and nature.

So you’re missing the points, big time.

Yes, the so called will of the people is whatever a small minority of individuals that run government says it is. The government represents a majority of people? :laughing:

What am I missing again?

You missed the point of the point about how “TG” is an expression and extension of individual personality and group character. You obviously have anarchistic-nihilistic-cynical tendencies, hence your definition that government is “a violent gang of criminals”, which many other people will readily disagree with, or simply, describe in other ways. Your society, on the other hand, is western liberal democracy. So when I say “will of the people”, you incorrectly presume that I meant the will of the voting masses, when I did not imply that. By “will of the people”, I meant specifically, the will of those who represent government, according to the subjective interpretations and definitions by which people conceive of “The Government”.

So you disassociated the concepts. For you, personally, you believe “the will of the people” (western democracy) is not the will of “TG” (the violent gang of criminals). Obviously that’s what you intended, but not what I intended. I retorted by correcting you. I’m talking about “the will of the people, of the government, so as you define it, that would be the will of the people of the violent gang of criminals”.

That you disassociate the concepts, leads me to believe that you suffer from victim-mentality. You probably believe that you are a victim of “TG”, and so, would claim that the will of the people is other than the will of the “violent gang of criminals” who, you probably blame, as dominating your life.

I would psychoanalyze you further. Something happened in your childhood and adolescence, probably bullied by a “violent gang of criminals/thugs”, and so, from those early life experiences, now you define “The Government” according to your personal and subjective, negative emotions and reactions. And this formulated your understanding of “TG” ever since, throughout your life. So perhaps now, you simply lack the imagination of how “TG” could be anything else but “a violent gang of criminals”.

You’re ignorant. You’re not listening to me, the OP, or much of anything. You’re not learning either.

Because if you had listened, had read and understood my points, then you would have caught early on, for example, how to a christian “The Government” means something entirely different than what you mean, what you intend, and your life experiences. The life of an average christian, attending church, believing in those mythologies and indoctrination, will conceive of “TG” as some type of spiritual, Holy Order, in which abrahamic-god is the Absolute Authority. Furthermore, there are many other types of government, and conceptions of government.

However it seems useless for me to engage you if you cannot recognize this simple and obvious fact. Even a mere disagreement, and ulterior definition of government, is enough to prove me right. If anybody believes that government is other than “a violent gang of criminals” (like what, Bloods and Crypts fighting each other in Los Angeles?) then it proves my point that “The Government” is an extension of these deeper concepts, and especially, the conception of “Authority”.

People base their understanding of “TG” on life experiences, directly related to, and what they can understand of, Authority.

I’d like to discuss these matters further with others here, but nobody is willing. So I can only hope these points strike you with some sense.

Are you incapable of empathizing with others??? Do you have a hard time understanding that other people do not live “in your world”? That some people have “good, better, easier” lifestyles in which they are not nihilistic, and happily invest in the system, because cooperation benefits them, when it does not benefit you? Or that your choice to resist against “TG” is your own, personal responsibility. And so you truly have no reason nor cause to be cyncial, because you choose your life?

However I don’t want to strip you away from your victim-complex…just yet. Are you tired of being a victim? Don’t you want power and control over your own life? Are you a man of your word? How can a woman or child depend on you, if you can never and will never depend upon yourself? Are you destined to be completely and utterly alone until you die? Is that what you want, or do you prefer “more”, “better”? Want to fuck a beautiful woman? Do you think a beautiful woman would fuck a guy who can’t take care of himself, has no power, no authority, no control over his own life? Do you think women would ever respect that?


Alright, so you disagree with my position of government being a group of violent criminals, if government is not that, what is it? No, I’m not an anarchist anymore, I’m just saying if governments can be violent career criminals then everybody else should be able to pursue similar paths for themselves. :sunglasses:

Now explain to me how governments are lead by noble good people and not criminals. :laughing:

I didn’t say that.

It’s a possibility that it is, but, you haven’t made any reasonable or convincing arguments that it is. Also you seem to be repeatedly missing the point of the thread.

What makes you believe that your ideal, your dream, your desire that “The Government” is a “violent gang of deceptive criminals” is anymore accurate, right, or truer than a christian who believes his government is a “benevolent all-seeing all-powerful invisible santa clause”?

Or isn’t it, merely your opinion?

You’re not disagreeing with me yet you’re begging the question and criticizing my views, very confusing. Look, I explained my view that all governments are criminal organizations masquerading behind benevolence or virtuous nobility, if you disagree with my held position I’ll welcome your arguments to the contrary. We can have a casual debate about it.

Also, I am just saying if governments can be ongoing criminal organizations then the common man and woman should be able to create their own criminal organizations/societies. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. This whole legalized criminality of prevailing governments while outlawing criminality from everybody else is nothing more than a monopoly trying to cut out any kind of competition from anybody else. It’s almost like a form of criminal socialism that bails out government criminals while penalizing everybody else for wanting to do the same.

It’s very obvious that the government is a highlevel gang and criminal organization ran by an even more higher level criminal organization, the banks.

I merely corrected you buy saying the will of the government is the will of its representatives. You said “the will of the people” was the unwashed, powerless masses.

So the misunderstanding rests with you. The main point of the OP, is how people abstract and understand notions of power, control, authority, and then conceptualize “The Government”. Your definition, “a violent gang of deceptive criminals” is insufficient. It doesn’t say much of anything. I could call the Bloods versus Crypt gang wars in Los Angeles, “a violent gang of criminals”. Does that then mean that they are the united states central government? No.

So your definition is shallow, and doesn’t say, nor explain much of anything.

It’s kind of side-tracked the whole thread. My original intention was for somebody to offer more in-depth analysis of how individuals and groups come to form their notions of “The Government”, and how the myriad different forms of governments, around the world, and throughout history, represent (or do not represent) specific groups of people. For example, what is the nature of Democracy exactly, versus Fascism? What would those societies look like? Why would they manifest?

However the quality of this conversation has gone down hill.

How banks exist.
How banana republics exist.

I am saying under any kind of government the majority of people have no power or real influence whatsoever where the will of the people as a political abstraction is empty, illusory, and basically signifies nothing at all. The people’s will represented in government is an illusory abstraction maintained in propaganda to satiate the largely idiotic masses that haven’t the slightest clue that they have been born into bondage and that their entire lives largely consists of a variety of slaveries. Behind every government is individuals that only work for their self interests only, I don’t care what kind of government it is the end result is always the same. Sure, they’ll put on a dog and phony show for the idiotic masses claiming they exist to serve them which is brilliant propaganda and occasionally they’ll throw the masses some bones or scraps to undermine unrest but throughout history it always repeats the same, only a handful of individuals within government see the benefit of its existence. There is so much criminal conspiracy of any kind of government against the common man and woman that makes up the majority of any given population that there is no other way to describe it other than criminal. The only difference between democracy and fascism is the differing level of propaganda in public relations maintaining social order. Ball is in your court now, looking forward to a response. Don’t give up on a conversation so easily!